OPINION: This article may contain commentary which reflects the author's opinion.
Alina Habba, an attorney representing former President Donald Trump’s Save America PAC, is slamming Special Counsel Jack Smith for moving quickly to have the U.S. Supreme Court consider the federal criminal case involving the 2020 election and Trump’s immunity defense.
The indictment accuses Trump of participating in criminal conspiracies to alter the outcomes of the 2020 presidential election. Trump has sought to dismiss the charges by claiming that he has presidential immunity.
Smith has raised the matter with the nation’s top court, stating that it should be addressed before the D.C. Circuit’s decision and referencing the upcoming March 4 trial date for Trump. With the Supreme Court’s approval, Trump is now required to reply by December 20. After that, they will determine whether or not to accept the case.
“There is some sort of real sense of urgency,” Habba said in an interview. “The only urgency that I can see is that there is an election in November 2024, and they can’t beat him.”
Habba said “everyone can see” what Smith is doing and said it “is election interference at its finest.”
“They can’t beat him in the ballots, so they’re going to have to either, you know, lie, cheat, steal, or the newest, lawfare, put him in jail, tie him up,” she told Fox Business Network’s Larry Kudlow.
Kudlow suggested that since Trump would have to sit in trial every day for the case, they don’t want him on the campaign trail.
Habba agreed and said, “It’s actually playing against them.”
“He’s getting a lot of voters that he normally wouldn’t get because they’re seeing this and he is the victim of, all of a sudden they’ve made him a victim of complete and utter election interference and lawfare,” she said.
Habba said she has faith in the Supreme Court because they “really take their office seriously, and we’ve seen that time and time again with that, especially recently.”
An attorney representing former President Donald Trump’s Save America PAC criticized special counsel Jack Smith during a Wednesday interview for what she is characterizing as questionable legal proceedings in the Jan. 6 election interference case.
Lawyer Christina Bobb told Newsmax TV’s Eric Bolling: “That’s very right. It’s a playbook that Jack Smith has done before; he’s trying to do the same thing to Donald Trump that he did to Bob McDonnell in Virginia. And this appeal must go as quickly as it possibly can for Jack Smith to keep the timeline, to be able to do exactly what he did with Bob McDonnell.”
Smith filed an emergency appeal with the U.S. Supreme Court, while Trump’s lawyers filed one with the Appeals Court for the District of Columbia in an attempt to determine if he is immune from prosecution because the alleged actions took place while he was still president. The nation’s highest court has agreed to hear Smith’s motion.
Bobb, meanwhile, was referencing Smith’s previous oversight of the Department of Justice’s public integrity unit, which secured a bribery and extortion conviction against former Virginia Republican Governor Bob McDonnell in a gift case. However, the Supreme Court later overturned the conviction with an 8-0 decision in 2016.
“He rammed through a conviction. It gets overturned eight to zero on appeal. Right. He’s exonerated, but in the meantime, the election took place and interfered with that exactly. That’s what he’s trying to do. Yep,” Bobb told Bolling.
She then questioned the defense’s lack of information regarding the high court appeal.
“What information did they get? Where did they get it? How did they get it? Was there a subpoena involved? Was there a FISA court involved?” she asked, noting further that the defense needed to know the details surrounding Smith’s actions ahead of the trial date, which was scheduled for March 4, though the federal judge overseeing the case, Tanya Chutkan, issued an order pausing it on Wednesday until the appeals played out.
“This is a blatant violation of due process. That’s depriving the president of an opportunity to provide a meaningful defense when they don’t even know what this information is,” Robb continued.
She then addressed the case being potentially dismissed anyway based on the constitutional principle of presidential immunity for most actions.
“It [Supreme Court] should dismiss the case immediately. Presidential immunity is well established in our case law,” she stated, echoing guest Peter Navarro’s view.
But she also warned of the far-reaching implications if presidential immunity is not held.
“If Jack Smith does get his wish on this, I think this is a very clear case of be careful what you wish for. Peter knows better than anybody how they’ve already obliterated executive privilege. And if they now obliterate presidential immunity, be very, very careful for the precedent you’re setting,” she told Bolling.
Earlier this week, Trump’s campaign also ripped Smith for his Supreme Court filing.
“Crooked Joe Biden’s henchman, Deranged Jack Smith, is so obsessed with interfering in the 2024 Presidential Election to prevent President Trump from retaking the Oval Office, as the President is poised to do, that Smith is willing to try for a Hail Mary by racing to the Supreme Court and attempting to bypass the appellate process,” a Trump spokesperson said.
“Deranged may need to be reminded that the Supreme Court has not been kind to him, including by handing down a rare unanimous rebuke when the Court overturned him 8-0 in the McDonnell case,” the spokesperson added.
Smith’s team acknowledged this was an “extraordinary request” in an “extraordinary case,” adding: “It is of imperative public importance that respondent’s claims of immunity be resolved by this Court and that respondent’s trial proceed as promptly as possible if his claim of immunity is rejected.”
