A legal expert blasted the Biden Department of Justice over a number of leaks to the media regarding cases involving former President Donald Trump, saying they “further reinforce” Republican claims that the probes are politically motivated and not based on any sound criminal evidence.
The criticism comes after the leaking of a sealed opinion from a judge claiming that Trump deliberately misled his counsel about classified documents discovered at his Mar-a-Lago residence.
According to a report by ABC News on Tuesday, a former federal judge wrote in a sealed filing last week that prosecutors provided “compelling preliminary evidence” suggesting that Trump “knowingly and deliberately misled his own attorneys about his retention of classified materials after leaving office.”
U.S. Judge Beryl Howell, who recently resigned from her post as the chief judge of the D.C. district court, stated in a filing last week that prosecutors in special counsel Jack Smith’s office had presented sufficient initial evidence indicating that the former president had committed criminal offenses. As a result, the attorney-client privileges asserted by two of his lawyers could be overridden, according to the report.
In her undisclosed filing, Howell mandated that Evan Corcoran, a lawyer representing Trump, comply with a grand jury subpoena to testify on six separate lines of investigation that he had previously protected under attorney-client privilege.
Howell concluded that prosecutors had met the prima facie standard required to override Corcoran’s privilege by demonstrating initial evidence that Trump had committed crimes. However, the judge emphasized that the prosecutors must meet a higher standard of evidence to pursue charges against Trump, and even more evidence to prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, the report continued.
But constitutional expert and Georgetown law school professor Jonathan Turley told Fox News the leak of the sealed filing was “deeply troubling” and a continuation of a “pattern of selective leaks that are designed to influence public opinion.”
“This is a continuation of a pattern of leaks related to Trump investigations that extend seven years, through the Russian collusion investigation,” Turley said.
“These leaks make a mockery of the system,” Turley added, noting that they “further reinforce the narrative of Donald Trump that the Department of Justice is engaging in unethical or improper means to target him in election year.”
The possible sources of the leaked information are limited to a small group of individuals, including the judge, the defense team, or the prosecution team, the latter of which consists of Justice Department employees, Turley noted.
Turley said that he is “surprised by the lack of effort by Attorney General Garland to deal with this pattern of strategic leaks.”
“These leaks have one overriding common denominator: they all tend to undermine Donald Trump and to implicate him in alleged crime,” Turley said, adding that Garland has expressed “no interest in investigating his own department.”
Meanwhile, Fox News host Mark Levin stated in a tweet Tuesday: “Either the judge or special counsel, or someone in their orbit, criminally leaked sealed information and obstructed justice. This clearly taints any would-be jury pool as well. It’s also an assault on the judiciary itself.”
“The president’s lawyers should march into court, and demand an immediate investigation. Moreover, they should seek dismissal of any charges that might be brought,” he added.
2. The president’s lawyers should march into court, and demand an immediate investigation. Moreover, they should seek dismissal of any charges that might be brought.
— Mark R. Levin (@marklevinshow) March 22, 2023
But Turley noted that the problem for Trump’s lawyers is that the “leakers know that the Justice Department has largely turned a blind eye to these violations.”
“Courts have treated these leaks like complaining about the weather. They profess unhappiness at leaks but rarely take meaningful action,” he said.
Regarding a tainted jury pool, Turley told Fox News Digital “it has gotten increasingly difficult for a change of venue in high-profile cases.”
“Because of the saturation of media and social media in the country, courts tend to…reject the notion that moving a case 100 miles is going to meaningfully change the jury pool. Those motions are overwhelmingly denied by courts,” he said.
