Trump Indictment 'Won't Survive Scrutiny,' Judicial Watch President Says

Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton, told the nation Friday that after a careful review of the charges against the 45th President Donald J. Trump crafted "by his political opponents at the Biden Justice Department," the indictment "won't survive scrutiny by honest, constitutionalist judges and will be thrown out." 

In a lengthy tweet, Fitton explained,
 

"I've carefully reviewed the indictment of Trump by his political opponents at the Biden Justice Department. (.@JudicialWatch
has nearly 30 years of experience litigating federal and presidential records issues, including the famous "Clinton sock drawer" case.)

The document dishonestly ignores the U.S. Constitution, the Presidential Records Act, legal precedent, and the DOJ's/Archives' previous position that WH records a president takes with him when he leaves the White House are presumptively personal and not subject to review by partisan Biden appointees at DOJ or Archives.

I've carefully reviewed the indictment of Trump by his political opponents at the Biden Justice Department. (.@JudicialWatch has nearly 30 years of experience litigating federal and presidential records issues, including the famous "Clinton sock drawer" case.) The document…

— Tom Fitton (@TomFitton) June 9, 2023

Trump himself referred to the infamous precedent of the "Clinton sock drawer" decision (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. Nat'l Archives & Records Admin.) in his remarks following his arraignment Tuesday which as Fitton noted, Judicial Watch actually litigated.
 

The "Clinton Sock Drawer" case, litigated by@JudicialWatch, shows how the Justice Department and the National Archives did an about face and ignored precedent and their own prior legal positions in targeting Trump over records that he had an unconditional right to have under the… pic.twitter.com/7BqFaSw4gH

— Tom Fitton (@TomFitton) June 13, 2023

In her memorandum decision U.S. District Court Judge Amy Berman Jackson made the presidential authority over document classification quite clear.

Berman Jackson ruled, 

"The Court notes at the outset that there is broad language in Armstrong I stating that the PRA accords the President “virtually complete control” over his records during his time in office. 924 F.2d at 290. In particular, the court stated that the President enjoys unconstrained authority to make decisions regarding the disposal of documents: “[a]lthough the President must notify the Archivist before disposing of records ... neither the Archivist nor Congress has the authority to veto the President's disposal decision.” Id., citing H.R. Rep. No. 95–1487, at 13 (1978), reprinted in 1978 U.S.C.C.A.N. at 5744. Since the President is completely entrusted with the management and even the disposal of Presidential records during his time in office, it would be difficult for this Court to conclude that Congress intended that he would have less authority to do what he pleases with what he considers to be his personal records."

Fitton concluded in his statement, "Under the Constitution, federal law and precedent, none of the documents are currently "classified" or "national defense information" that restricts Trump's handing of them. They are ALL his personal records and, frankly, should be returned to him. If justice prevails, this indictment won't survive scrutiny by honest, constitutionalist judges and will be thrown out."


The most overtly concerning part of this development is that the Democrats under President Joe Biden and in his Department of Justice are blatantly ignoring their own precedent from a ruling that favored former President Bill Clinton to target Trump. In legal circles, this is called 'willful disregard' for the relevant case law and could easily result in complaints before the bar and a wrongful prosecution lawsuit.

You can follow Matt Holloway on Facebook, Twitter, TruthSocial, Gettr, Gab & Parler.