Trump Says Jack Smith Briefing A Timed ‘Hit Job’—Here Are The Facts

Experts speaking to Newsweek have debunked Donald Trump’s claim that the release of a new briefing by special prosecutor Jack Smith, outlining the case to prosecute the former president, was a “hit job,” saying Trump knew about it and had caused the delays leading to its release.
U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan on Wednesday made public a lengthy filing from special counsel Jack Smith following his investigation into the former president’s alleged efforts to interfere with the transfer of power following the 2020 election. Trump denies the allegations.
Trump claimed that “Deranged Jack Smith” and the “DOJ” had timed the release following the vice presidential debate, in which many considered running mate JD Vance came out top.
Smith’s brief, filed last week but made public on Wednesday, aims to convince Chutkan, who is overseeing the federal election subversion case, that Trump’s alleged offenses are private rather than official acts and can, therefore, remain in the indictment. In July, the Supreme Court ruled presidents had broad immunity for official acts.
It contained the government’s evidence against Trump, who has pleaded not guilty to four felony charges related to attempts to overturn his 2020 election loss and to the January 6 U.S. Capitol attack that followed.
The release led to a series of social media posts from Trump, accusing the Smith and others of interference.
In a post on Truth Social, posted on October 2, 2024, Trump said: “Democrats are Weaponizing the Justice Department against me because they know I am WINNING, and they are desperate to prop up their failing Candidate, Kamala Harris.
“The DOJ pushed out this latest ‘hit job’ today because JD Vance humiliated Tim Walz last night in the Debate. The DOJ has become nothing more than an extension of Joe’s, and now Kamala’s, Campaign.”
In another post the same day, Republican presidential candidate Trump named Jack Smith among those who had “weaponized” the Department of Justice (DOJ).
“Deranged Jack Smith, the hand picked Prosecutor of the Harris-Biden DOJ, and Washington, D.C. based Radical Left Democrats, are HELL BENT on continuing to Weaponize the Justice Department in an attempt to cling to power,” Trump said.
Elsewhere he wrote: “This is a case of Election interference by Jack Smith. Old information that should not have been released prior to the Election. There was no reason to release it. Gregg Jarrett, FoxNews.”
This is by no means the first time that Trump has accused his opponents of weaponizing branches of government to undermine his reputation during the election campaign.
Indeed, Trump has had matters to celebrate his week. JD Vance was considered by many to have performed better than his opposite number, Tim Walz, in the vice presidential debate on Tuesday while a series of polls show that Trump is pushing ahead in battleground states.
The release of the briefing to those unfamiliar with this Trump investigation could perhaps be persuaded that this was a matter of political interference, an argument frequently made by the former president and his supporters.
However, even a quick reading of the events shows that the timing was coincidental and was arguably precipitated by Trump’s actions.
Former federal prosecutor (now partner at Jones Walker LLP) David Weinstein, told Newsweek that docket entries from September 5 showed Judge Chutkan had ordered the government to file its briefing by September 26. The clerk of the court was directed to publicly file that briefing on September 27.
“Yet again, he [Trump] is not correct,” Weinstein said.
“Jack Smith had nothing to do about when the pleading was made public. The release of the pleading was not timed to the VP debate and election. It was purely coincidental.
“As can see from the docket, the Judge set these dates back at the beginning of September.”

Trump’s representatives were given and took the opportunity to file a motion in response to the order making the government’s brief public, and calling for further redactions. However, Chutkhan said there were insufficient grounds and explanations for further redactions and criticized the “political bias” argument Trump representatives made.
“In addition to the assertions discussed above, Defendant’s opposition brief repeatedly accuses the Government of bad-faith partisan bias,” Chutkan wrote.
“These accusations, for which Defendant provides no support, continue a pattern of defense filings focusing on political rhetoric rather than addressing the legal issues at hand.
“Not only is that focus unresponsive and unhelpful to the court, but it is also unbefitting of experienced defense counsel and undermining of the judicial proceedings in this case.
“Defendant has had an opportunity to make his case that his prosecution is improperly motivated.”
Professor Anthony Alfieri, the Director of the Center for Ethics and Public Service
at the University of Miami School of Law, told Newsweek that Jack Smith had a duty to make efforts to expedite litigation and that the motion for immunity determinations advanced the government’s case in “rightful redress.”
“Absent evidence of bad faith or some otherwise improper purpose, the new motion seems altogether permissible and consistent with the legitimate interests of the government in moving the course of the litigation forward,” Alfieri said.
“Thus far, there is no credible evidence that the motion will materially prejudice the court proceedings and no evidence of prosecutorial dishonesty.”
As explained by Temple University Charles Klein Professor of Law and Government Craig Green speaking to Newsweek, the schedule for filing the government’s brief was set weeks ago, by Chutkan, and each party would have had the opportunity to make objections.
“The choice to unseal the document yesterday—a document originally filed on September 26—was made by Judge Chutkan,” Green said.
“Here again, if Mr. Trump’s lawyers feared political fallout, they could have objected, even more so if they suspected political motives.
“Judge Chutkan’s decision to unseal, and the timing of the decision to unseal, were hers alone—nothing to do with Jack Smith—and she made that choice with every opportunity for Mr. Trump’s lawyers to object and be heard if anything seemed potentially improper, unseemly, or political.”
As Green explained further, the briefing was filed to evaluate Trump’s immunity defense after the Supreme Court ruled in favor of presidential immunity earlier this year.
“This is the opposite of a ‘hit job.'” Green said.
“It is a fully proper legal effort to comply with the Supreme Court’s ruling from this summer.
“Jack Smith did not wish or plan to file this kind of brief at all.
“On the contrary, he was hoping to proceed forward to trial by now, which is only further evidence that he is controlling almost none of the timing and procedure decisions in this case.”
As former federal prosecutor Peter Zeidenberg told Newsweek it has been the former president’s camp that has sought delays to push the trial beyond the election.
“Obviously, this is baseless; the schedule for this filing was set by Judge Chutkan, not Jack Smith, and it clearly had nothing to do with the Vice-Presidential debates,” Zeidenberg said.
“Jack Smith has been pushing to get this case tried for two years. It is Trump who has sought delay after delay, and he has succeeded in preventing the trial in going forward before the election. Now he is complaining that the litigation is still ongoing.
“That is his doing, not Jack Smith’s.”
Newsweek has contacted a media representative for Donald Trump for comment.
Trump is accused of conspiracy to defraud the United States, conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, obstruction and attempting to obstruct an official proceeding, and conspiracy against rights in connection with an alleged pressure campaign on state officials to reverse the 2020 election results.
Trump has denied all charges against him and repeatedly said he is the victim of a political witch hunt. He has accused Smith of attempting to interfere in the 2024 presidential election by prosecuting him.
In late August, Smith filed an updated indictment of Trump, reshaping the case to comply with the Supreme Court’s ruling granting immunity to sitting presidents when conducting certain “official” acts.
The new indictment removes all accusations leveled against Trump regarding attempts to pressure the Department of Justice to falsely declare that President Joe Biden’s 2020 election win was the result of massive fraud after the Supreme Court ruled that was official conduct.