An NPR investigation has revealed that the Justice Department has not released certain Epstein files that contain allegations of President Trump sexually abusing a minor. These previously undisclosed documents reportedly include 50 pages of FBI interviews and notes from conversations with an accuser who was a minor at the time of the alleged abuse. This disclosure contradicts earlier assurances from Attorney General Pam Bondi and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, who stated to Congress that no records were withheld for reasons of embarrassment or political sensitivity involving any government official or public figure.
Read More
A Trump-appointed judge has ruled that the final report from Special Counsel Jack Smith regarding Donald Trump’s alleged mishandling of classified records and obstruction of justice will not be released. The judge cited the unusual nature of a prosecutor disseminating findings after a case was dismissed, stating it is not customary for such reports to be publicly shared when charges did not result in a guilty verdict. This decision represents a significant victory for former President Trump in his efforts to keep the special counsel’s findings private. Transparency groups continue to pursue appeals for the release of the report, arguing for the public’s right to know what was uncovered in the investigation.
Read More
A federal judge has permanently blocked the release of special counsel Jack Smith’s report concerning Donald Trump’s handling of classified documents at Mar-a-Lago. U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon ruled that releasing the report would cause a “manifest injustice” to Trump and his co-defendants, citing that the special counsel’s appointment was unlawful and the charges were ultimately dismissed. This decision upholds the presumption of innocence for individuals facing criminal charges, distinguishing this situation from historical instances where special counsel reports were released after cases concluded with guilt adjudications.
Read More
Attorney Pam Bondi is advocating for the continued concealment of Volume II of Special Counsel Jack Smith’s report regarding Donald Trump’s handling of classified documents. Bondi asserts that this section contains privileged and confidential information, therefore should not be released to the public. This legal move comes as Trump seeks to block the release of the files, citing concerns about sensitive grand jury materials and protected information. Judge Aileen Cannon, a Trump appointee, is overseeing the case, while Smith testified about proof beyond a reasonable doubt of Trump’s guilt.
Read More
Special Counsel Jack Smith, during a hearing before a Republican-led congressional committee, asserted that President Trump’s actions in the 2020 election conspiracy and classified documents cases clearly violated the law. Smith presented evidence demonstrating Trump’s criminal activity, emphasizing that his investigation was based solely on facts and not political motivations. Despite facing criticism from Republican lawmakers, Smith defended his pursuit of the cases, specifically highlighting Trump’s role in the January 6th attack and the mishandling of classified documents. Although indictments were won in both cases, the cases were abandoned due to existing legal opinions.
Read More
During a House Judiciary Committee hearing, Special Counsel Jack Smith testified, predicting a likely criminal indictment from the Trump administration as part of a retaliatory campaign. Smith, overseeing investigations into Donald Trump, vowed not to be intimidated and acknowledged the challenges faced by his team. The hearing largely revisited the 2020 election, with Republicans criticizing Smith’s methods and Democrats defending his actions. Smith defended his impartiality, emphasizing his apolitical service and experience. The proceedings featured intense questioning on his appointment, investigation costs, and tactics, including payments to a confidential source and obtaining congressional call logs.
Read More
During a House committee hearing, former special counsel Jack Smith defended his decisions to prosecute President Trump, including the decision to bring charges against him. Smith stated his investigations provided proof “beyond a reasonable doubt” of Trump’s criminal activity. Smith affirmed he would pursue the same course of action regardless of the president’s political affiliation, emphasizing that “no one should be above the law.” These investigations led to unprecedented indictments that were delayed due to Department of Justice policy preventing the prosecution of a sitting president.
Read More
During Jack Smith’s congressional testimony, Rep. Ben Cline questioned the gag order imposed on Donald Trump, suggesting a lack of “real-world harm” to justify it. However, the judge had already cited evidence of threats and harassment against individuals targeted by Trump’s public attacks. Smith countered by emphasizing the appeals court’s agreement on the basis for the order, highlighting the threats to witnesses and confirming the court’s narrowing of the order. Smith then detailed the evidence of Trump’s intimidating statements, further solidifying the necessity of the gag order.
Read More
Former Special Counsel Jack Smith testified before the House Judiciary Committee, defending his decision to prosecute Donald Trump based on evidence of criminal activity related to the 2020 election and attempts to overturn the results. Smith asserted that Trump knew his claims of election fraud were false yet persisted in promoting them to maintain power. He also warned about Trump’s campaign of retribution against those involved in the cases. Smith expressed concern over the state of the rule of law under a second Trump administration, emphasizing its fragility and the need for collective commitment to uphold it.
Read More
Former Special Counsel Jack Smith testified before the House Judiciary Committee, defending his decision to bring charges against Donald Trump for his efforts to overturn the 2020 election results. Smith’s testimony followed a previous closed-door interview and focused on his investigation into election interference, including the controversial decision to obtain phone call metadata from Trump-allied lawmakers. Smith justified these actions by stating they were necessary to establish a timeline and emphasized that the investigation was a direct result of Trump’s actions, and not the actions of those lawmakers. He also refuted Republican arguments that his actions were a violation of the First Amendment, asserting that fraudulent activities are not protected.
Read More
John Q. Hosedrinker