Jack Smith Torches Judge Cannon Over Insane Jury Instructions

Special prosecutor Jack Smith laid into Judge Aileen Cannon in a court filing this week when he accused her of using flawed legal arguments in her jury instructions. Cannon has said that jurors will be instructed that the classified documents were considered Trump's personal property unless Smith releases the classified intelligence to the jury - which they are legally not permitted to see. Many experts have predicted that this insane motion could lead to Cannon's removal from the case, but Smith is giving her one last chance to correct her mistake. Ring of Fire's Farron Cousins explains what's happening.

Check out our merch by visiting our store

Subscribe to our podcast

Become a member today!

Support us by becoming a monthly patron on Patreon, and help keep progressive media alive!

Spread the word! LIKE and SHARE this video or leave a comment to help direct attention to the stories that matter. And SUBSCRIBE to stay connected with Ring of Fire's video content!

Support Ring of Fire by subscribing to our YouTube channel

Be sociable! Follow us on:

*This transcript was generated by a third-party transcription software company, so please excuse any typos.

Special prosecutor Jack Smith has now fired back against Judge Eileen Cannon. Over the documents case, specifically the jury instructions that she released a couple weeks ago that basically says you're gonna have to tell the jurors that either Donald Trump claimed all of these records were his personal records, therefore we can't prosecute him or Jack Smith. Judge Cannon had said, you're gonna have to show all of these jurors, all of these classified documents, which we all know they actually don't even have clearance to see. Jack Smith understandably was off about this. And in a filing on Tuesday evening, Jack Smith told Judge Cannon that she quote, uh, rested on an unstated and fundamentally flawed legal pr uh, legal premise, and that any jury instructions that include this information from the Presidential Records Act would distort the trial and of course, unfairly sway the jury into believing something that is actually not true.

In other words, Jack Smith is letting Judge Cannon know, listen, you've put out flawed jury instructions that actually run afoul of the law, and Jack Smith included in his filing, if you don't fix this, because again, it's legally wrong, I have no choice but to take the matter to the appellate court at that point when it comes to that. And notice I said when it comes to that, not if it comes to that, but when it comes to that, Smith will have the clearance necessary to ask the appellate court to remove Judge Cannon from the case, which of course is the best thing that could happen here. Judge Cannon has repeatedly delivered these flawed rulings, these flawed instructions, these flawed decisions from the bench, all of which have favored Donald Trump. And in this specific one, based on the letter of the law, Smith is right. What Cannon has instructed them to do is technically illegal because she is basically telling them, you have to tell the jurors that all of these documents were personal, which if you do that, case dismissed. So she is influencing the jury with these instructions. Now, Trump's lawyers love it. They said, uh, Trump's legal team suggested Canon tell jurors that Trump was authorized to access the classified records during his presidency and that certain precedents allow for former presidents to access certain documents. So they're super excited. However, um, Smith also points this out in his ruling. You can't say that Trump made these his personal documents because there's literally not a single witness who backs that up. So again, legally you

Cannot do this, but it is what it is, right? This is what Canon has done. She overstepped her bounds. She has unfairly given Donald Trump a massive advantage since the very beginning. This is what she does, and it's catching up to her. And I think the appellate court will not hesitate if Smith, you know, has all of his evidence stacked up over the last few months, gives it to them and says, kick her off the case. I don't think the appellate court has a choice at that point, but I'm gonna take it a step further because I don't think removing her from this case is enough. I think that we can go as far as to say, based on the evidence that Smith has undoubtedly been piling up, that she abused her power, which is a crime to aid Donald Trump.