Expert Explains Judge Cannon’s ‘Ominous’ Message To Jack Smith – It’s Great News For Trump

The collective heads of liberal analysts everywhere are exploding in the wake of devastating pushback by Southern Florida District Judge Aileen Cannon against special counsel Jack Smith who earlier this week “threw down the gauntlet” with threats to appeal her ruling on jury instructions.

Glenn Kirschner, a progressive former federal prosecutor, said Judge Cannon has given Smith an “extremely ominous” message about her plans to potentially deny his request to issue a quick ruling on competing jury instructions submitted by former President Donald Trump’s legal team regarding the Presidential Records Act.

The former president’s lawyers have insisted that all documents retained from his time in the White House were declassified under the law, even those containing national security secrets. Smith contends their interpretation is “baseless” and concocted out of “whole cloth” and said he will appeal Cannon’s ruling if she allows the instructions to be considered by a jury.

“Remember, a couple of days ago Jack Smith filed a scorched-earth filing in this case saying, Wait a minute, Judge Cannon, you’re proposing to give two jury instructions and those jury instructions say the Presidential Records Act means that Donald Trump is essentially not guilty of the charges,” Kirschner said on Brian Tyler Cohen’s YouTube show The Legal Breakdown on Thursday evening, Newsweek reports.

He continued: “And Jack Smith responded by saying that’s not an accurate formulation of the law. And if you give those jury instructions, you will be orchestrating an acquittal, you’ll be orchestrating a not guilty verdict, and you’ll be doing it at a time after the trial has already started, after the jury has sworn in, after jeopardy attaches. You’ll be doing it at a time when the prosecutors couldn’t appeal you if you dismiss the case.”

That’s your problem, Judge Cannon essentially shot back at Smith.

“Separately, to the extent the Special Counsel demands an anticipatory finalization of jury instructions prior to trial, prior to a charge conference, and prior to the presentation of trial defenses and evidence, the Court declines that demand as unprecedented and unjust,” she wrote in a ruling that day.

Jury instructions, she continued, are “a genuine attempt, in the context of the upcoming trial, to better understand the parties’ competing positions.”

Kirschner interpreted that to mean, “I will wait until after the jury is sworn. I will wait until after evidence has been presented. I will wait until after Donald Trump has put on his defenses.”

“And then: ‘I still may give that lawless jury instruction about how the Presidential Records Act means the jury must find Donald Trump not guilty. And guess what, Jack? You can’t appeal it at that point. Game over,'” he said.

“This is the most mind-blowing potential abusive judicial discretion imaginable,” he added.

President Trump continues to wait for a ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court about whether he is immune from prosecution as a former president, another avenue that Smith hopes to ward off during an upcoming hearing on April 25th.

Legal observers have noted that Trump’s team could string out appeals of his original loss on the immunity claims for as long as 90 days, pushing the start of both federal trials into the summer. Other elements, including routine requests to review millions of pages of evidence introduced by Smith, will add to the delay.