His [Trump’s] legal team’s submission states that, between the classified information on foreign interference and biased intelligence reports, “this evidence will undercut central theories of the prosecution and establish that President Trump acted at all times in good faith and on the belief that he was doing what he had been elected to do.”
The submission notes that Smith has argued in legal submissions earlier in October that “the classified discovery issues” in this case are “limited,” “tangential,” “narrow” and “incidental” because “the charges … do not rely on classified materials.”
In his submissions, Smith references the 2020 Russian case several times as an example of why the U.S. government must be guarded in handing over classified documents to defense lawyers.
He’s gonna lose this one, too. Their main objection is that the evidence being referenced isn’t what Trump is being charged for, to which Jack Smith is like, “Duh, we know.” It’s meant to illustrate Trump’s character, and that’s why it’s not necessary to Jack’s case or necessary to share the specific documents with Trump’s lawyers via discovery (something they’ve been trying to get their hands on, unsuccessfully). The content doesn’t matter. That they exist does.
This is a DOA motion, brought to you by the “best” lawyers Trump could find.