Trump complains to judge that Kamala Harris has used Jack Smith’s evidence in ads

Donald Trump and Kamala Harris

Donald Trump fought and failed to delay another release of prosecutors’ evidence in the 2020 election interference case against him.

In a court filing Thursday, Trump’s attorneys asked a federal judge to hold off on the release of more documents from special counsel Jack Smith until November 14 — nine days after the 2024 presidential election.

US District Judge Tanya Chutkan responded late Thursday evening, rebuking the arguments made by Trump’s lawyers. She ordered the release of more evidence on Friday.

Trump’s lawyers complained in a filing that his Democratic rival, Vice President Kamala Harris, has used prosecutors’ recently released evidence in the case in political ads.

“The incumbent Vice President — whose administration the Special Counsel serves — also began featuring the Special Counsel’s brief in political advertisements for the 2024 Presidential Election,” Trump’s attorneys wrote in the court filing.

“Thus, without any semblance of due process — including President Trump’s right to cross-examine witnesses and call his own witnesses in a court proceeding — the public has been poisoned by a one-sided prosecutorial narrative that is being used for political purposes by the incumbent administration,” Trump’s lawyers added.

There’s no evidence to suggest Harris, whose campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment, has coordinated anything with Smith’s team. The January 6 prosecution predates Harris’ late emergence as the Democratic Party’s presidential nominee.

A spokesperson for Smith’s team declined to comment. But in the past, the special counsel has directly challenged Trump’s assertions that he’s trying to influence the election.

“The defendant’s opposition includes his standard and unsupported refrain that the Government’s position is motivated by improper political considerations. That allegation is false,” Smith’s team wrote in a previous filing over how to redact the documents before they are released.

Chutkan has previously admonished Trump’s team for seemingly raising conspiracy theories in their arguments.

“Not only is that focus unresponsive and unhelpful to the court, but it is also unbefitting of experienced defense counsel and undermining of the judicial proceedings in this case,” Chutkan wrote in her ruling on the redactions earlier this month.

She added that Trump’s side had a chance to make its point about political motivations, and now it was time to focus on the legal arguments.

Trump’s campaign has turned the former president’s struggles into fundraising fodder. Some of Trump’s best fundraising days this cycle have been tied to major events related to his various legal cases, underlining how the former president himself benefits in blurring the line between his prosecutions and his 2024 campaign.

Earlier this month, Chutkan released prosecutors’ partially-redacted, 165-page motion detailing a trove of evidence against Trump in the election interference case.

The motion — in which Smith and his team argued that Trump is not immune from criminal charges tied to his efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election — includes a breakdown of Trump’s alleged pressure campaign against his then-vice president, Mike Pence.

Additionally, the court documents said that Trump replied, “So what?” after he was told by an aide that Pence was in danger and rushed to a secure location during the January 6, 2021 Capitol riot.

Harris’ campaign has since used details from Smith’s motion, along with headlines about it, in a recent online political ad that also highlighted Trump’s alleged “So what?” reply.

According to Politico, Harris’ campaign aired the ad titled “Bombshell” digitally in swing states.

Trump’s attorneys argued in the Thursday court filing that the “asymmetric release of charged allegations and related documents during early voting creates a concerning appearance of election interference.”

“These concerns are particularly poignant given the incumbent Vice President’s targeted and ongoing, and false, use of these proceedings in election advertising,” Trump’s lawyers wrote.

Attorneys for Trump didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment by B-17.