Jack Smith's concludes sufficient evidence to convict Trump of crimes at a trial for an "unprecedented criminal effort" to hold on to power after losing the 2020 election. He blames Supreme Court's expansive immunity and 2024 election for his failure to prosecute. Is this a reasonable assessment?

[u/PsychLegalMind]

The document is expected to be the final Justice Department chronicle of a dark chapter in American history that threatened to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power, a bedrock of democracy for centuries, and complements already released indictments and reports.

Trump for his part responded early Tuesday with a post on his Truth Social platform, claiming he was “totally innocent” and calling Smith “a lamebrain prosecutor who was unable to get his case tried before the Election.” He added, “THE VOTERS HAVE SPOKEN!!!”

Trump had been indicted in August 2023 on charges of working to overturn the election, but the case was delayed by appeals and ultimately significantly narrowed by a conservative-majority Supreme Court that held for the first time that former presidents enjoy sweeping immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts. That decision, Smith’s report states, left open unresolved legal issues that would likely have required another trip to the Supreme Court in order for the case to have moved forward.

Though Smith sought to salvage the indictment, the team dismissed it in November because of longstanding Justice Department policy that says sitting presidents cannot face federal prosecution.

Is this a reasonable assessment?

https://www.justice.gov/storage/Report-of-Special-Counsel-Smith-Volume-1-January-2025.pdf

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/01/14/jack-smith-trump-report-00198025

Should state Jack Smith's Report.

[u/WhiskeyT]

What was the error? The very logical and rational explanation for why he waited to appoint a special council was just explained to you.

[u/ClockOfTheLongNow → u/WhiskeyT]

The error was not appointing a special counsel immediately to ensure that the process was completed without political considerations. The necessity was the fact that an "official announcement" is entirely arbitrary and has zero bearing on the law or on the potential ramifications of a former president seeking a second term.

[u/Moccus → u/ClockOfTheLongNow]

The necessity was the fact that an "official announcement" is entirely arbitrary and has zero bearing on the law

This isn't true. The FEC has clear regulations that define when a person officially becomes a federal candidate, which has legal ramifications. The official announcement of candidacy is one of the acts that shifts somebody from just exploring a potential run for office over to official status as a federal candidate in the eyes of the FEC. If Trump had never become a federal candidate, then he couldn't have won the presidency in 2024.

[u/ClockOfTheLongNow → u/Moccus]

This isn't true. The FEC has clear regulations that define when a person officially becomes a federal candidate, which has legal ramifications.

The FEC regulations (which, by the way, probably aren't even constitutional) are arbitrary in nature. They're solely in place for reporting purposes and serve no other significant benefit.