Staff Reports
Will Scharf, a former Assistant U.S. Attorney and Missouri Attorney General candidate, has made some compelling points on Twitter that the mainstream media appears to be ignoring. Scharf contends that the indictment against former President Trump is “outrageous” and highlights the arguments of Mike Davis of the Article 3 Project and Michael Bekesha of Judicial Watch. He notes that if their argument holds up, the first 31 counts based on “unauthorized possession” could fall.
Former Asst. U.S. Attorney Takes Apart Trump Case and Raises Some Important Questions https://t.co/JLw7XovLeM
— RedState (@RedState) June 16, 2023
Scharf also explains that proving Trump’s intent to unlawfully retain classified documents is difficult, given that he may have believed they were personal records. Additionally, classified documents do not necessarily fall under the category of national defense information in the Espionage Act.
I am a former Assistant U.S. Attorney, worked on two Supreme Court confirmations, and clerked for two federal appellate judges.
The indictment and case against President Trump is outrageous and shocking.
But let’s get into the details.
Here are my 6 key points on the case:
— Will Scharf (@willscharf) June 15, 2023
(1) Interplay between the Espionage Act and the Presidential Records Act
A lot of my friends have spoken insightfully about the scope of the Presidential Records Act. I’d direct you to Mike Davis’s (@mrddmia) commentary on the subject, and also Michael Bekesha of…
— Will Scharf (@willscharf) June 15, 2023
(2) Classification and National Defense Information
I want to reiterate this point because it’s really important:
Just because something is classified—even Top Secret, SCI, NOFORN, FISA, pick your alphabet soup—does not mean that it is National Defense Information (NDI) within…
— Will Scharf (@willscharf) June 15, 2023
(3) Walt Nauta and DOJ Misconduct
Far and away the most troubling side story to emerge from this saga so far are the allegations made by Trump aide and co-defendant Walt Nauta’s lawyer last week.
You may have missed it if you blinked. Not surprisingly, the mainstream media has…
— Will Scharf (@willscharf) June 15, 2023
(4) Attorney Client Privilege
The indictment relies on a significant amount of information received, in one form or another, from one of Trump’s lawyers, Evan Corcoran, who was compelled to testify in front of the grand jury. According to news reports, the argument for breaching…
— Will Scharf (@willscharf) June 15, 2023
(6) Jack Smith: Why him?
If you could pick any lawyer in the country to handle a controversial case against a former president, a case involving an aggressive, unprecedented use of the Espionage Act, a controversial law in and of itself, what lawyer would you pick?
You’d…
— Will Scharf (@willscharf) June 15, 2023
Scharf raises concerns about potential misconduct, including the allegation that the Special Counsel’s team tried to get co-defendant Walt Nauta’s lawyer, Stanley Woodward, to cooperate against Trump. There are also questions about attorney-client privilege and whether the charges were structured to get testimony from Evan Cocoran, one of Trump’s attorneys.
Scharf asserts that the speed at which the indictment was brought proves it is politically motivated. He suggests that the Trump team move for a continuance until after the election, as the indictment will hang over the entire election season.
Lastly, Scharf criticized Special Counsel Jack Smith for his “overzealous” prosecution of Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell, which was unanimously overturned by the Supreme Court. Scharf raises concerns about why Smith was chosen to lead this prosecution.
Overall, this indictment against the former President is yet another example of the left’s relentless pursuit to “Get Trump” at any cost, even if it means weaponizing law enforcement and intelligence apparatuses against him. It is concerning that our republic is allowing such dishonest tactics to occur.
