The Gloves Come Off: Jack Smith's Scathing Report

Unlike Mueller, Smith Directly Accuses Trump of Crimes

In a significant and fast-developing legal saga, it has come to light that Special Counsel Jack Smith has completed a draft of his final report.

Lawyers for Donald Trump and his co-defendants in the Florida case, Walt Nauta and Carlos DeOliveira, have already reviewed the document.

This revelation emerged not through any official announcement but through a court filing made by Nauta and DeOliveira’s legal team and a letter sent by Trump’s attorneys to Attorney General Merrick Garland.

Both documents seek to block the release of Smith’s report, claiming it would violate constitutional rights, interfere with pending criminal proceedings, and prejudice public opinion.

The report, currently in the hands of the Department of Justice, is expected to be released imminently by Garland, pending his review.

A Sharp Departure from Precedent

The legal filings reveal that the report is divided into two volumes, likely corresponding to the January 6th election subversion case and the classified documents case.

Trump’s lawyers have highlighted the extraordinary nature of the report, which directly accuses the former president of heading criminal conspiracies and engaging in illegal conduct.

This approach represents a sharp departure from the precedent set by Special Counsel Robert Mueller.

Unlike Mueller, who refrained from outright claims of criminality due to concerns about fairness and the constraints of investigating a sitting president, Smith appears to have taken a more direct and confrontational approach.

Lawyers for the three alleged co-conspirators claim the Smith draft accuses Trump of orchestrating criminal schemes even though his cases were dismissed.

This report spans at least 229 pages and has already ignited fierce legal battles over its release. (That assumption is based on information gleaned from the Garland letter and the Nauta/DeOliveira pleading.)

The stage is set for a contentious legal showdown with Nauta and DeOliveira’s team arguing that Smith’s alleged unconstitutional appointment taints the report and Trump’s lawyers claiming it violates presidential immunity and due process.

Amidst this backdrop, we examine the content of Smith’s groundbreaking report, its sharp contrast to Mueller’s cautious approach, and its potential consequences for Trump, his co-defendants, and the broader legal and political landscape.

Smith's Report: A Bold Departure

Jack Smith's final report, which has been reviewed in hard copy by lawyers for Donald Trump and his co-defendants, represents a stark contrast to previous special counsel investigations.

According to Trump’s legal team, the report accuses Trump of leading criminal conspiracies and engaging in an "unprecedented criminal effort."

These accusations are detailed across both volumes of the report, which outline the former president’s alleged criminal conduct in relation to the two major investigations that dominated headlines throughout 2024.

Direct Accusations of Criminal Conduct

Unlike previous special counsel reports, Smith's document explicitly accuses Donald Trump and others of engaging in criminal conduct, going so far as to name Trump the "head of the criminal conspiracies."

Specifically:

1. Volume I of the report alleges that Trump orchestrated an "unprecedented criminal effort," spearheaded multiple criminal conspiracies, and acted with a "criminal design." These charges are repeated throughout the document, including key sections on pages 3, 52, 60, 64, 67, 88, 108, and elsewhere.

2. Volume II asserts that Trump violated multiple federal criminal laws, detailing allegations of criminal conduct that extend beyond his own actions to include his co-defendants and other unnamed conspirators. Key accusations appear on pages 60, 88, 89, 121, and more.

These accusations are particularly noteworthy because they were made despite the dismissal of the cases against Trump and the absence of a jury's determination of guilt.

Trump’s lawyers have sharply criticized the report, arguing that it violates fairness principles, as Trump and his co-defendants lack the opportunity to defend themselves in court against these public accusations.

Scope of Alleged Criminal Conduct

Trump’s legal team has revealed the full scope of the accusations against the former president as outlined in Smith’s report:

• Criminal Conspiracy: The report portrays Trump as the central figure in multiple criminal conspiracies, alleging that he directed and coordinated illegal efforts to subvert the 2020 election results and obstruct justice in the classified documents case.

• Unprecedented Criminal Effort: Smith’s report characterizes Trump’s actions as part of an "unprecedented criminal effort," suggesting a deliberate, large-scale, and systemic pattern of criminal behavior.

• Multiple Federal Law Violations: The document accuses Trump of violating numerous federal laws, implicating him in a broad range of illegal activities.

• Criminal Design: The report alleges that Trump harbored a "criminal design," implying premeditation and intent behind his actions.

These direct accusations mark a significant escalation in the legal and political scrutiny facing Trump, distinguishing Smith’s approach from that of Robert Mueller, who refrained from making similar claims during his investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.

Contrasting Approaches: Smith vs. Mueller

The stark difference between Jack Smith's approach and that of Robert Mueller is one of the most striking aspects of this development.

Mueller's Cautious Approach

Robert Mueller's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election was characterized by a cautious and methodical approach.

Key aspects of Mueller's strategy included:

1. Adherence to DOJ Guidelines: Mueller was guided by an Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) opinion that a sitting president cannot be indicted, which significantly influenced his decision-making process.

2. Non-Exoneration Without Accusation: Mueller's report did not conclude that Trump committed a crime but explicitly stated that it did not exonerate him. The investigation identified ten episodes where Trump may have obstructed justice but refrained from making a prosecutorial judgment.

3. Deference to Congress: Mueller left the decision on whether to pursue impeachment or other actions to Congress.

4. Incomplete Evidence: The investigation faced challenges such as encrypted, deleted, or unsaved communications, as well as false or incomplete testimony, contributing to an incomplete picture of the events.

Smith's Bold Stance

In contrast, Jack Smith's report takes a much more assertive position:

1. Direct Accusations: Smith's report explicitly accuses Trump and others of criminal conduct, marking a significant departure from Mueller's cautious approach.

2. Detailed Allegations: The report alleges that Trump led criminal conspiracies and violated federal laws, even in the absence of a jury verdict.

3. Extensive Documentation: At least 229 pages long, the report provides detailed accusations and specific page references where these claims are made, offering a thorough and damning account of Trump’s alleged actions.

Legal and Constitutional Challenges

Trump's legal team has raised several objections to Smith's draft report and its accusations:

1. Presumption of Innocence: The lawyers argue that Smith's accusations violate the presumption of innocence, as they make claims of criminality without a jury determination of guilt.

2. DOJ Policies: The letter claims that Smith's actions violate Department of Justice policies, including those prohibiting extrajudicial statements by prosecutors.

3. Constitutional Concerns: Trump's attorneys assert that Smith's appointment and actions violate the Appointments Clause, the Appropriations Clause, and potentially interfere with the Presidential Transition Act.

4. Political Motivation: The legal team accuses Smith of pursuing a politically motivated campaign against Trump, describing his actions as part of a "bad-faith crusade" on behalf of the Biden-Harris administration.

Potential Implications

The release of Jack Smith's report, with its direct accusations against a former president, could have far-reaching implications for legal accountability, public trust, and political discourse.

The report’s bold accusations and the resulting legal challenges ensure that this unprecedented case will remain at the forefront of national attention.

Conclusion

Jack Smith's final report represents a significant shift in how special counsels approach investigations involving high-profile political figures.

By directly accusing Trump of criminal conduct and portraying him as the head of criminal conspiracies, Smith has departed from precedent, introducing new questions about presidential accountability and the limits of prosecutorial authority.

As Attorney General Garland reviews the report and its release looms, the legal and political ramifications of Smith’s bold accusations remain uncertain but undoubtedly historic.

Enjoying the insights?
Help keep the content flowing—subscribe for free or become a paid supporter of independent journalism and receive exclusive weekly eBooks and monthly Audio/Video Books!

No matter how you choose to support this work, I’m grateful to have you here.

Thank you for reading,

Stay strong,

samuel