CNN Analyst Says ‘Quite Clear’ Trump Prosecutors Looking At Obstruction of Justice By Hauling Trump Org Into Court

CNN legal analyst Elliot Williams said it’s “quite clear” that recent grand jury moves show prosecutors are looking into “obstruction of justice” in the Mar-a-Lago documents case.

A new report by Katelyn Polantz and Paula Reid shows that the Special Counsel Jack Smith-led Justice Department probe into the Trump classified documents case is focusing on the handling of surveillance footage from Mar-a-Lago following a DOJ subpoena:

Prosecutors for special counsel Jack Smith have been asking questions in recent weeks about the handling of surveillance footage from former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort after the Trump Organization received a subpoena last summer for the footage, according to multiple sources familiar with the investigation.

The handling of the footage, and how employees within the Trump Organization responded to the Justice Department’s demand for it, have prompted a new round of grand jury subpoenas to top Trump employees in the last few weeks, the sources told CNN.

Longtime Trump Organization executives Matthew Calamari Sr. and his son Matthew Calamari Jr. are expected to appear Thursday before the grand jury investigating possible mishandling of classified documents brought to Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home, sources said. Prosecutors are expected to ask them about the handling of the surveillance footage and Trump employees’ conversations following the subpoena, according to the sources.

On Thursday’s edition of CNN News Central, co-anchor Kate Bolduan asked Williams to interpret the recent developments, including the hauling of Trump Org figures Matthew Calamari Sr. and Matthew Calamari Jr.:

KATE BOLDUAN: What do you think of the fact that the special counsel is now looking to how the Trump Organization handled this surveillance footage? What what does it say to you?

ELLIOT WILLIAMS: It seems quite clear that they’re looking into obstruction of justice. I think there’s two buckets of crimes possibly being investigated here, the actual mishandling or possession of documents in violation of law, but also obstruction of justice after the fact. And I think what they will be trying to get at today is, number one, any conversations leading up to any moving or mishandling of of surveillance footage, but also conversations afterward, as Paula had noted. All of those could go to this question of whether someone tried to falsify or conceal a record as a means of getting in the way of an investigation.

KATE BOLDUAN: Eliott, to go down this road, is this just good due diligence in an investigation or do you think there’s some inkling, some tip, some suggestion that something was tampered with?

ELLIOT WILLIAMS: I mean, yes and no. It’s I mean, certainly it could be due diligence, but the simple fact is you ought not use a grand jury just for a fishing expedition to try to find new crimes.

More often than not, what they’re doing is following up on leads or information they had. And it would seem that they had some evidence or indication, maybe not something they could get into court or bring a whole case around, but some evidence or indication that some file or some footage or some box was moved as a means, specifically knowingly, which is the language in the law, knowingly to get in the way or impede or disrupt the investigation.

Watch above via CNN News Central.