Jack Smith Describes What He Wants the Public to See

... and it's a lot more than Trump bargained for!

If you’ve been reading The Breakdown and listening to the Jack Podcast, you’d know that we’ve been warning that we would not get a mini-trial, and that Jack Smith’s highly anticipated immunity brief would contain significant redactions.

Today, we got a peek into what Jack Smith is asking the court to keep under seal, and what he says can be released to the public. That peek comes in the form of the Jack Smith motion for permission to file under seal that I’ve been expecting.

As I watched the docket yesterday, I noticed that NOTHING was docketed by the due date of 5 PM ET for the 180 page immunity brief. Not even a motion to file under seal. Not even an entry saying that a motion to file under seal had been filed, or that the immunity brief had been filed under seal.

Just … nothing.

I asked a friend if it was possible that the motion to file under seal had been filed under seal. And as it turns out, it was.

We learned that today, as Judge Chutkan announced via minute order that she had received the brief, and asked trump to respond to Jack Smith’s proposed redactions by October 1st (for his response to the redactions in the motion), and by October 10th (for his response to the redactions in the appendix.)

Right after that order came down, the clerk of the court published Jack Smith’s motion to file under seal - which includes his argument for what should remain under seal and what should be released to the public.

And it appears that Jack Smith wants to release exactly what we thought he would. Here’s an excerpt from his motion to file under seal:

[The Government has] proposed redacted versions of its sealed Motion and sealed Appendix for filing on the public docket.

In the proposed redacted Motion, the Government has redacted the names of individuals (aside from those whose names appear publicly in the superseding indictment, such as the defendant and Vice President Michael R. Pence. In the Motion’s text, the Government has not redacted quotations or summaries of information from Sensitive Materials, but in the footnotes has redacted citations that reveal the non-public sources of such information, including grand jury transcripts, interview reports, or material obtained through sealed search warrants.

In the proposed redacted Appendix, the Government has redacted non-public Sensitive Materials in their entirety. And the Government also has proposed limited redactions to some publicly-available materials, such as the defendant’s Tweets, when such material identifies or targets an individual who—because of their status as a potential witness or involvement in underlying events—may be susceptible to threats or harassment, or may otherwise suffer a chilling effect on their trial testimony.

Notice that I bolded the words “motion” and “appendix”. That’s because Jack Smith’s filing comes in two parts. The motion is his narrative explanation for why the evidence and acts are not immune (as outlined in my previous post about what to expect in the immunity brief.) The appendix is all the transcripts, grand jury testimony, and evidence.

So here’s what Jack Smith wants:

REDACTED:

1. In the motion, he wants witness names redacted except the obvious ones the public knows about, like Mike Pence for example.

2. In the motion, he wants the footnotes that identify the sources of the information redacted.

3. In the appendix, he wants grand jury testimony, materials obtained through sealed search warrants, transcripts and reports of witness interviews, and materials obtained from other governmental entities redacted.

PUBLIC:

1. In the motion, he wants summaries and quotes of information from the grand jury testimony, materials obtained through sealed search warrants, transcripts and reports of witness interviews, and materials obtained from other governmental entities MADE PUBLIC.

2. In the appendix, he wants already-public evidence like Trump’s tweets made public except when they mention potential witnesses.

The best part is that a year ago, while litigating the protective order over discovery, Jack Smith wanted to seal everything, and Trump argued against that. Judge Chutkan ruled in Trump’s favor back then, and now the tables have turned. Trump wants it all under seal, while Jack Smith is just following the Judge’s orders.

Be careful what you wish for!!

That’s pretty much what I was expecting, EXCEPT the summaries and quotes from sensitive materials - I did not see that coming. And THAT is where we could get new information we haven’t seen before.

Tune in Sunday to the Jack podcast, where Andy McCabe and I will explain it all!

~AG