Trump’s Lawyers Compare Jack Smith to the Grinch in Filing Complaining He Expects Them to ‘Work Round-the-Clock Through the Holidays’
Former President Donald Trump’s legal team compared Special Counsel Jack Smith to the Grinch in an official legal filing urging the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit not to honor Smith’s request that it quickly decide whether or not Trump is immune from prosecution in the 2020 election interference case.
“The prosecution has one goal in this case: To unlawfully attempt to try, convict, and sentence President Trump before an election in which he is likely to defeat President [Joe] Biden,” argued Trump’s lawyers in the filing before going on to call it “a blatant attempt to interfere with the 2024 presidential election and to disenfranchise the tens of millions of voters who support President Trump’s candidacy.”
Later, they complained that Smith’s “proposed schedule would require attorneys and support staff to work round-the-clock through the holidays, inevitably disrupting family and travel plans.”
“It is as if the Special Counsel ‘growled, with his Grinch finger nervously drumming, ‘I must find some way to keep Christmas from coming. … But how?'” they continued in a rhetorical flourish.
In their opposition to expedited review in the DC Circuit, Trump’s attorneys accuse Jack Smith of secretly being The Grinch. pic.twitter.com/aTduVKan7z
— Randall Eliason (@RDEliason) December 13, 2023
Smith has made it clear that his preference is to participate in a speedy trial that could see Trump convicted prior to the 2024 election, in which the Republican frontrunner is presently favored against Biden, according to most polls.
In a filing with the Supreme Court earlier this week, Smith made the case for the judicial system’s expedited review of Trump’s claim to immunity:
This case should therefore be resolved expeditiously, so that trial proceedings may resume if and when respondent’s claim of immunity is ultimately rejected. And given the weighty and consequential character of the constitutional questions at stake, only this Court can provide the definitive and final resolution of respondent’s immunity claims that this case demands. Those considerations counsel in favor of immediate and expedited review in this Court, under the established criteria both for certiorari and for certiorari before judgment.
In a separate filing with the D.C. Circuit, Smith has submitted that “the public has a strong interest in this case proceeding to trial in a timely manner.”
