Trump Says Only Women Should Play Women's Sports, You Agree?

Jack Smith Not Hurting Trump’s Election Chances

Former Judge Andrew Napolitano shared his insights with Newsmax regarding the ongoing election interference investigation led by special counsel Jack Smith, particularly its implications for former President Donald Trump and the upcoming election. Napolitano emphasized that the recent release of details surrounding the January 6 protests may not significantly alter the electoral landscape.

In an interview on “Wake Up America,” Napolitano downplayed the impact of the information being released, stating, “I don’t see this as a major development.” He noted that once the remaining details come to light—particularly the identities of Trump’s alleged co-conspirators—the story might quickly lose traction unless something particularly shocking emerges.

The context of this discussion includes a recent decision by Federal Judge Tanya Chutkan, who rejected Trump’s request to delay the release of additional information until after the election. She asserted that transparency in the judicial process is essential, and any attempt to obscure these details could be perceived as interference in the electoral process. Napolitano supported this viewpoint, stating, “The Constitution mandates transparency, especially in criminal cases. The judiciary has a duty to inform the public.”

Napolitano also pointed out that Chutkan had previously unsealed significant evidence after a Supreme Court ruling regarding presidential immunity. With 57 alleged co-conspirators’ names still redacted, the anticipation surrounding their eventual disclosure could shift public attention from Trump to these individuals. “We already know names like Mark Meadows and Rudy Giuliani, but the identities of the other 55 remain unknown,” he noted.

Looking ahead, Napolitano predicted that the story might diminish in importance by the following week. He also discussed a recent civil fraud ruling against Trump amounting to $454.2 million, suggesting that while the judgment may be drastic, it could ultimately be significantly reduced upon appeal. He characterized the judgment as punitive rather than reflective of actual harm done to the Trump Organization, which is not a public company.

In summary, Napolitano’s analysis suggests that the unfolding events surrounding Trump may generate temporary headlines, but their long-term significance for the upcoming election could be limited.