'Eye-catching' detail in court filing could make Jack Smith’s Mar-a-Lago case even stronger: analysis

11 October 2023

President Donald Trump's legal team has requested a postponement in the trial for special counsel Jack Smith's Mar-a-Lago documents case, which is scheduled to begin on May 20, 2024. But Smith, in an October 9 court filing, responded that he saw no reason for a delay and said he would be ready to go.

The Washington Post's Aaron Blake, in an analysis of that filing published on October 11, describes a "nugget that catches your eye": Smith's office discussing "why Trump allegedly took and kept the documents" at issue in the case.

Smith alleges that Trump endangered the United States' national security by storing classified government documents at Mar-a-Lago — documents that, according to Smith, should have remained in Washington, D.C. when Trump's presidency ended. Trump has maintained that any documents he had at Mar-a-Lago were declassified before he left office.

POLL: Should Trump be allowed to hold office again?

In the filing, Smith's office wrote, "That the classified materials at issue in this case were taken from the White House and retained at Mar-a-Lago is not in dispute…. What is in dispute is how that occurred, why it occurred, what Trump knew, and what Trump intended in retaining them — all issues that the Government will prove at trial primarily with unclassified evidence."

Blake stresses that showing a motive for keeping the documents, although perhaps not essential, could be helpful to Smith's case.

"Smith's team might not necessarily need to prove Trump's intention or his motive in the case," Blake explains. "You have documents, you fail to return them when the government comes calling — and that's a crime regardless of why you did it, the argument goes. Trump's indictment in the case made no direct claims about a potential motive. But that doesn't mean proving Trump's motive wouldn’t be helpful."

Blake elaborates, "Indeed, establishing a motive would seem to drive home the intention of Trump's actions and combat any arguments that this was all a misunderstanding — or that Trump somehow didn't know what he had, which the government has taken care to undermine."

Read Aaron Blake's full Washington Post analysis at this link (subscription required).

From Your Site Articles