berg80
Diamond Member
- Oct 28, 2017
- 33,424
- 27,259
- 2,820
Staffed by some of the most experienced prosecutors in the Department, my Office operated under the same Department policies and procedures that guide all federal prosecutors. The regulations under which I was appointed required that we do so, see 28 C.F.R. § 600.7(a), and our work benefited from those processes. The Department has long recognized that proceeding with "uniformity of policy ... is necessary to the prestige of federal law." Robert H. Jackson, "The Federal Prosecutor" (April 1, 1940). As a result, throughout our work we regularly consulted the Justice Manual, the Department's publicly available guidebook on policies and procedures, and adhered to its requirements.
Our work rested upon the fundamental value of our democracy that we exist as "a government of laws, and not of men." John Adams, Novanglus, No. VII at 84 (Mar. 6, 1775). In making decisions as Special Counsel, I considered as a first principle whether our actions would contribute to upholding the rule of law, and acted accordingly. Our committed adherence to the rule of law is why we not only followed Department policies and procedures, but strictly observed legal requirements and dutifully respected the judicial decisions and precedents our prosecutions prompted. That is also why, in my decision-making, I heeded the imperative that "[n]o man in this country is so high that he is above the law," United States v. Lee, I 06 U.S. 196,220 (1882).
https://www.justice.gov/storage/Report-of-Special-Counsel-Smith-Volume-1-January-2025.pdf
Smith and his team followed the letter of the law in performing their assigned task. What they found during their investigation compelled them to convene a grand jury, the members of which voted to indict trump based on the overwhelming evidence. Twice in the J6 case.
www.lawfaremedia.org
trump's lawfare ensued, and the cases were postponed until they became moot after the election. IOW, trump's strategy of avoiding having to stand trial, not prove his innocence, worked. No amount of spin from trump fans alters those fundamental facts.
Just today I've read the comments from a few trump supporters claiming that the cases against trump being dropped shows they never should have been brought. Or that it's evidence of his innocence. Neither belief is grounded in reality. Smith resigned because he knew he would be fired. He dropped the cases because he knew trump's DoJ would drop them. And because of the OLC prohibition against prosecuting a sitting prez. Not because of the viability of the cases based on the facts.
The dismissal of the criminal cases does not erase the evidence of trump's guilt. Rather, the dismissals will always be an indictment of our system of justice. One ill prepared to deal with the unforeseen circumstances of how a rich man, aided by his enablers, exploited weaknesses in our system of justice to arrive at an unjust end.
Our work rested upon the fundamental value of our democracy that we exist as "a government of laws, and not of men." John Adams, Novanglus, No. VII at 84 (Mar. 6, 1775). In making decisions as Special Counsel, I considered as a first principle whether our actions would contribute to upholding the rule of law, and acted accordingly. Our committed adherence to the rule of law is why we not only followed Department policies and procedures, but strictly observed legal requirements and dutifully respected the judicial decisions and precedents our prosecutions prompted. That is also why, in my decision-making, I heeded the imperative that "[n]o man in this country is so high that he is above the law," United States v. Lee, I 06 U.S. 196,220 (1882).
https://www.justice.gov/storage/Report-of-Special-Counsel-Smith-Volume-1-January-2025.pdf
Smith and his team followed the letter of the law in performing their assigned task. What they found during their investigation compelled them to convene a grand jury, the members of which voted to indict trump based on the overwhelming evidence. Twice in the J6 case.
The Superseding Trump Indictment Charts Jack Smith’s Path Forward
Smith has reworked the Jan. 6 case against Trump in light of the Supreme Court’s decision on presidential immunity.
www.lawfaremedia.org
trump's lawfare ensued, and the cases were postponed until they became moot after the election. IOW, trump's strategy of avoiding having to stand trial, not prove his innocence, worked. No amount of spin from trump fans alters those fundamental facts.
Just today I've read the comments from a few trump supporters claiming that the cases against trump being dropped shows they never should have been brought. Or that it's evidence of his innocence. Neither belief is grounded in reality. Smith resigned because he knew he would be fired. He dropped the cases because he knew trump's DoJ would drop them. And because of the OLC prohibition against prosecuting a sitting prez. Not because of the viability of the cases based on the facts.
The dismissal of the criminal cases does not erase the evidence of trump's guilt. Rather, the dismissals will always be an indictment of our system of justice. One ill prepared to deal with the unforeseen circumstances of how a rich man, aided by his enablers, exploited weaknesses in our system of justice to arrive at an unjust end.
