Biden Administration
Trump Case Likely to be Dismissed, Due to DOJ Misconduct
The alleged behavior is undoubtedly flagrant and arguably unprecedented. A judge would have every right to consider dismissal if the allegations were confirmed.
Waltine “Walt” Nauta, a Navy valet who worked in Trump’s White House and who continued to be a personal aide to Trump after he left office, is one of Trump’s co-defendants. Former DOJ Counterintelligence Chief Jay Bratt, who is currently a member of Special Counsel Jack Smith’s team of prosecutors, was named the target of accusations made by Nauta’s attorney, a renowned, highly esteemed Washington attorney named Stanley Woodward, a few weeks ago. According to news reports, Woodward claimed in a sealed letter to D.C. District Chief Judge James Boasberg that during a meeting to discuss Nauta’s case, Bratt said that if he couldn’t persuade Nauta to testify against Trump, it might affect Woodward’s application to be a D.C. Superior Court judge.
If confirmed, and there is no reason why Woodward would fabricate such a threat — let alone risk his career by telling a federal judge such a thing — Bratt’s alleged misconduct could lead to harsh penalties and even be a reason to throw out the entire case against Nauta and Trump. Depending on the details of what was said, Bratt might even be charged with a crime.
Courts have the discretion to completely dismiss indictments in situations where there has been egregious prosecutorial misconduct. U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon would be perfectly within her rights to consider a dismissal in this case if Woodward’s claims are validated. The alleged behavior is perhaps unprecedented and unquestionably flagrant, amounting to nothing less than an attempt by a senior DOJ official to deny a defendant his right to counsel under the Sixth Amendment through improper and possibly illegal actions.
Trump and Nauta should at least receive an explanation. In cases of alleged prosecutorial misconduct, courts frequently permit the defense to conduct discovery, including depositions and requests for documents and communications, to ascertain the depth, breadth, and consequences of any misconduct that may have taken place. To understand what Bratt said and why, the defense team in this case should ask for his testimony.
The defense attorney should also make an effort to subpoena any communications between Bratt and others in the DOJ or the White House regarding Woodward’s application for a judgeship or Bratt’s general approach to Woodward.I anticipate that these communications will be illuminating and could point to additional wrongdoing by the DOJ, the special counsel’s team, and their political overlords.
All of this is undoubtedly known to the legal teams defending Trump and Nauta, and I have no doubt that they will vigorously pursue this and other lines of defense. However, the American people also have a right to be informed of the full extent of the Department of Justice’s senior officials’ misconduct.
Republicans in Congress should aggressively and publicly demand answers.The House Judiciary Committee has the authority to look into issues involving the federal court system’s administration of justice.To find out what’s going on, it has the authority to subpoena Bratt, the other attorneys working on the Trump prosecution, and top Biden administration officials.
There is no doubt that this is a big deal. Bratt’s actions might even be considered criminal by federal law. Depending on what exactly was said, Bratt’s conduct could constitute attempted witness tampering in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1512(b)(1), attempted federal bribery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 201(b)(3), attempted extortion by a federal official in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 872, or attempted subornation of perjury in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1622.
Bratt’s actions and any other alleged misconduct by Jack Smith’s team should be the subject of an investigation by a special counsel if the Department of Justice is sincere about treating this case in an open and transparent manner.
Haircuts
July 5, 2023 at 6:30 pm
Wonderful web site. A lot of useful information here. I am sending it to some friends ans additionally sharing in delicious. And of course, thank you for your effort!
MyMars
July 6, 2023 at 6:14 am
It’ll never happen. They’re not going to let Trump go. Do you think they came this far to let him off?
Dirk Manly
July 6, 2023 at 1:24 pm
The judge comes from Columbia, a place where those who immigrated to the U.S. aren’t very hospitable to either leftists or globalists.
Joseph Vallez
July 6, 2023 at 3:58 pm
-Its plainly clear that the people in Washington D.C. have it in their minds that they run the show, they say what goes, they are above sanction and restraint and that the US citizen will do as they are told; we pay them but thats the extent of our input here.
-After reading the full 155 page ruling out of Arkansas a few days ago I am certain weve got a serious issue on our hands. There was not even a single person involved in all those meetings, with all those socials, in all of those weeks and months that decided it would be better to resign than to commit obviously unconstitutional activities. Most of these people were attorneys… how can they not know better? Is it possible not a single one did or is it more likely they didnt give a s**t about the 1st amendment to say nothing of the rest of them.
-Time to clean house folks… this monster will destroy us all if not reigned in.
A Conservative
July 6, 2023 at 9:38 pm
Click bait. Garbage. It would be great if it happened, but there’s zero evidence it is likely.
Mr. Kozzi
July 10, 2023 at 1:04 am
You must be dreaming … Truth hurts! Get a real opinion ok?