
<p>In every modern presidential election, there is what has become known as the “October Surprise.” ; It has become such a regular part of the late election season that it is only a surprise if there is not one.</p>



<p>In years gone by, the surprise was some unanticipated and unplanned event – such as the economic crash that catapulted Barack Obama into the presidency over John McCain. Sometimes the surprise is the result of a dubious action by a person or agency with an arguably partisan perspective – such as FBI Director Comey’s reopening the Hillary Clinton case on the eve of the 2016 election, only to abruptly close it again.</p>



<p>Now we have the unsealing of the 190-page prosecutorial brief against President Trump by Special Counsel Jack Smith. ; There is only one reason Smith asked the brief to be unsealed in October – and Judge Tanya Chutkan agreed to do so – and that is to influence the outcome of the presidential race to Trump’s detriment.</p>



<p>There are many reasons why this action at this time was inappropriate and outrageous. ; But there can be no question as to its political motivation. ; That is clear because there is no compelling reason for the one-sided prosecutorial brief to be made public.</p>



<p>This is not a verdict on the issues. ; Under the American system of justice, the defendant – in this case Trump &#8212; is perceived to be innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. ; That essential part of the process will not take place until after the election. ; Trump will have no opportunity to defend himself against the charges before the election.</p>



<p>The document does not establish guilt – and many of the allegations are highly disputable. ; There is even a question as to whether this revised brief will pass muster with the Supreme Court, which has recognized a level of immunity for presidents acting in an official capacity. ; Whether the actions cited in Smith’s brief are private or presidential is still debatable even as crafted in this latest revision.</p>



<p>In fact, it is unprecedented for the prosecutor to reveal their case before the defense has asked for – and have adjudicated – a dismissal request. ; Smith was running over rules and tradition to get this brief into the public sector.</p>



<p>In addition, the Department of Justice has a policy against taking action in matters close to an election. ; It is Rule 9-85.500 states (highlight added):</p>



<p><em>“Federal prosecutors and agents may <strong>never</strong> select the timing of any action, including investigative steps<strong>, criminal charges, or statements</strong>, for the purpose of affecting any election, or for the purpose of giving an advantage or disadvantage to any candidate or political party.”</em></p>



<p>Smith is attempting to influence public opinion ahead of the election in violation of the DOJ’s own rules &#8230; period.</p>



<p>Smith well knows that political operatives and biased media will use the information as campaign fodder. ; Democrats and the left-leaning media will not remind voters that a person is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. ; They will not offer up the defense arguments.</p>



<p>MSNBC radical left-winger Lawrence O’Donnell has already played judge and jury, declaring that the prosecutorial brief proves Trump to be criminally guilty “beyond a reasonable doubt.” ; That arrogance (from a guy who personifies arrogance) is not only a lie, but a contemptuous disregard for the entire American judicial system.</p>



<p>Trump can get into hyperbole in his criticism of the Justice Department as an agency driven by political influences, but he is not always wrong – and certainly not wrong in this case. ;</p>



<p>Those in charge of the Justice system are not only supposed to avoid political bias, but even the appearance of political motivations.  ;In this instance, the DOJ and the courts have gone far beyond a mere appearance – and have waded into the murky waters of politicized justice – or more accurately injustice.</p>



<p>While the action is intended to hurt Trump, it is the Department of Justice that loses credibility. ; It makes a mockery of Attorney General Merrick Garland’s recent proclamation that the DOJ operates only on law and evidence – immune to political influences and other considerations. ; (I will pause while you regain your composure.)</p>



<p>I do not always agree with Trump’s accusations against all of the various prosecutorial offices that have gone after him – but in this case, he is spot on. ; This is nothing less than an effort to use (abuse) the justice system for political purposes – to influence an election.</p>



<p>Is this the October Surprise – or is there more to come?</p>



<p>So, there ‘tis.</p>

Is the unsealing of the Trump prosecutor brief the October Surprise?
