So, the question you should be asking yourself: why did Jack Smith leak the tape?

[Goodheart]

OK, that's not really MY question. It's a trumpian's, who asked it of me:

"at this point you need to ask why the special counsel leaked the audio of the tape to cnn…. for what reason?

here’s the thing: the audio proves nothing. It is the sound of President Trump talking about presidential papers that are claimed by the DOJ to be “classified” or “secret.”
despite your most heartfelt wishes the audio will NEVER be used at trial – if there is even a trial – which is highly unlikely, because it cannot be admitted into evidence.
That’s why Jack Smith gave it to them. The audio is useless, except for the value in promoting the lawfare narrative
Why? Because the documents that are claimed to be heard in the audio are nowhere to be found. That’s right, the DOJ and FBI never found any “classified” or “super-secret” documents as described in the audio. As a result, the audio represents nothing, because without the documents the audio is inadmissible.
You cannot submit evidence in court of a person talking about documents without the documents the audio is supposedly talking about.
Can you see the issue now? As a result, the audio is nothing more than President Trump talking about something the prosecution cannot identify or prove. It’s inadmissible, hence no value, hence the leak"


I thanked him for the comedy.

[Effete Snob]

1. Why the fuck buy into the narrative that Jack Smith is corrupt?

The most likely source of the recording is the owner of the recording.

This is the third or fourth time I've read this shit on DU today. There are people here who are determined to undermine Smith.

[H2O Man]

13. +1

I don't know if it would be better if a Democrat thought that Mr. Smith leaked the tape, or if others are simply attempting to spread doubt. Neith seem very attractive options to me.

[Goodheart]

16. Are you under the impression that I bought into it?

Read it again.

I just wanted the board to see the "defense" that's floating around now.

[ancianita]

17. Jack Smith absolutely did not "leak" it.

He gave the proof to the Trump defense. Cannon allowed media access to the unclassified evidence. CNN got it and released it.

It is not a leak. You don't understand how a Special Counsel works, nevermind Jack Smith. Nothing is "floating around" here.

Here's the Jack Smith team's motion timeline:

------JUNE 21 2023 -- Jack Smith Prosecution Team Conveys 'Discovery' Unclassified Evidence
GOVERNMENT’S RESPONSE TO THE STANDING DISCOVERY ORDER
https://assets.bwbx.io/documents/users/iqjWHBFdfxIU/rrFr6Xz_L07c/v0

------JUNE 23 2023 -- 3 pre-trial prosecution motions
------------1) To delay Trump/Nauta’s trial to December 11, 2023; Judge Cannon wants a reason.
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.648653/gov.uscourts.flsd.648653.34.0.pdf
------------ 2) To file a sealed list of witnesses that Trump/Nauta are prohibited from speaking to about the case; Judge Cannon has ruled against sealing, in the public/media interest.
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.648653/gov.uscourts.flsd.648653.33.0.pdf
------------ 3) For a pre-trial conference under CIPA; Judge Cannon has set July 14 for pre-trial conference
---------https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.648653/gov.uscourts.flsd.648653.32.0.pdf

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100218042715

[Goodheart]

19. I never claimed he did.

Read my post again.

[ancianita]

20. Ah, I see. Okay, then. Thanks.

Now you can pass these facts along to the comedian.

[allegorical oracle]

34. The case, itself, includes quotes from that tape. And it's highly doubtful that Smith, knowing how

critical the tape is, hasn't already interviewed most, if not all (except tfg), of the principals heard in the tape. Smith is meticulous.

[ShazamIam]

2. Might be caused by the Trump and Magats claiming the documents were planted at Mar a Lago.

[VMA131Marine]

3. What they don't get ...

Even if Trump declassified all the documents, he still could not assert they were his personal property and take them with him. He’s being charged with taking national defense and intelligence information; classification status is irrelevant. Plus, he says right on the tape the document is still classified. Further, Jack Smith only has to produce in court the other people in the conversation to get it admitted as evidence. You can bet he will get both the staffer and the writer and has already talked to them and reminded them what perjury is.

[maxsolomon]

4. They didn't leak it.

FOI request.

And the toadies in the room will identify the documents at trial (if it gets that far).

[former9thward]

18. You can't get evidence in a case by a FOI

And there was none. It was leaked.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/26/politics/trump-classified-documents-audio/index.html

[ancianita]

23. The CNN report doesn't say the tape was leaked, either.

The audio recording comes from a July 2021 interview Trump gave at his Bedminster resort for people working on the memoir of Mark Meadows, Trump’s former chief of staff.

It was handed over to Special Counsel, who then used it in the actual indictment, then provided the tape with the unclassified evidence drop to Cannon and the defense team.

[former9thward]

27. The poster said it was a FOI request.

That is not true. The judge has an order not to release evidence. So it was leaked. How else would they get it?

[machoneman]

28. Hey, the dumbshit has MULTIPLE people using their cell phones to record his damning statement. Why..

,,think only 1 recording exists? Likely, a MAGAT or former follower leaked it or forwarded it to someone who did leak it.

[ancianita]

33. You got proof of that? If so, link it.

[intrepidity]

5. If by "lawfare narrative" they mean the Lawfare podcast/website

Then I am maximally impressed that any Trumpians even know what that is, much less know about any content therein.

That said, it may be a valid point, since the document at issue indeed has not been found (yet) in Donald's possession. Terribly unfortunate that Bedminster was never searched, one more casualty of DOJ/FBI foot-dragging.

No doubt witnesses will be testifying about what documents were being discussed during that session. At one point Trump says, "Here, give me that" which indicates that the doc was in the hands of someone besides himself and I've no doubt that there is already grand jury testimony by that person describing what they were holding. When the prosecution has that person on the stand, they will then show them the copy DOJ has and ask them to verify it was the same doc and how they know. And so on.

[Ocelot II]

6. Jack Smith didn't leak the tape. No way.

It almost certainly came from the person who made it in the first place, or from TFG's team. He's done that sort of thing before, to try to get in front of something damaging in order to debunk or devalue it before it can be used against him.

[Kingofalldems]

7. Did a little research--now I get it.

[wnylib]

8. How interesting that you were able to present

the entire MAGA view of "a trumpian" in the OP, without a response to that person, whoever it was, other than, "Thank you."

Just wondering. Do you agree with the "trumpian?"

[Recycle_Guru]

38. lol. yup.

[onenote]

9. Denial isn't just a river in Egypt

First, there are witnesses who were present when the tape was made and will vouch for its authenticity and, presumably, will testify to the fact that Trump had a document marked classified in his hands. So the trumpian is dreaming when he/she says the tape won't be admitted into evidence.

Second, how does he know Smith doesn't have the document that Trump was flashing around. There are 31 documents referenced in the indictment. It could be one of those documents. Or it could be a document that was turned over in response to the subpoena or seized in the search of Mar-a-Lago and Smith has elected not to make it the basis of a charge in the Florida case and may use it if there is a NJ case.

[H2O Man]

10. There is zero evidence

that Jack Smith leaked the tape. Odd that anyone would suggest he did.

[Goodheart]

21. They know it's damning. It's an act of desperation to claim Jack Smith leaked it.

[rsdsharp]

11. It sounds like somebody thinks they understand the best evidence rule.

But they really don’t.

[brooklynite]

12. Step 1: call the author to the stand as a prosecution witness.

Step 2: Ask the author: was your conversation recorded?

Step 3: Play the tape.

Step 3: Ask the author: was that a recording of your conversation?

[ancianita]

24. Exactly what's going to happen.

[lindysalsagal]

14. By that logic, defenders need only burn or lose evidence

Even if its corroborated by other people and evidence.

[Kid Berwyn]

15. Perhaps the leak came from the person who made the recording?

Must've been someone close to Donald J Treason. Ask to see Melanie's device.

[Goodheart]

22. If I had to bet I'd wager it came from trump's team

[ancianita]

25. No, because it was taped by, and owned by, the team writing the Meadows book.

[Goodheart]

26. You mean "The Rat" leaked it?

Yeah, I can see that, too.

[ancianita]

30. You see rats where there are none.

Making shit up that you want to believe is a feature of your opponents. Don't act like them.

[FakeNoose]

29. Jack Smith never leaks anything ... end of discussion

Oh, the tape was leaked by somebody else? Well that's a different story.

There were several people in the room and I doubt that any of them signed an NDA. Except maybe Chump's press secretary Liz Harrington. She may have signed an NDA, but I doubt she made the recording anyway.

One thing I'm certain of, Jack Smith wasn't in the room.

[ancianita]

31. +1 You're right, as usual.

[MissMillie]

32. I'm not even sure this can be called a "leak"

There's a transcript of this conversation in the Federal indictment... which has already been made public.

[Prairie_Seagull]

35. This recording was done at Bedminster NJ not Florida.

I am not sure how it works but I doubt this judge will allow evidence from Georgia or New Jersey to be used as evidence in Florida.

Maybe some of our legal folks could better answer this?

[Goodheart]

36. I don't see why not.

[Prairie_Seagull]

40. Further info Goodheart.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143094156

Better explains my similar thinking.

[Recycle_Guru]

37. thank you foe sharing what "your friend" thinks about this

I guess we'll all just have to wait and see.

[Goodheart]

39. Not my friend.