CBS News
Trump, special counsel lay out opposing plans for way forward in federal 2020 election case
Washington — Federal prosecutors and attorneys for former President Donald Trump presented opposing arguments for how special counsel Jack Smith’s 2020 election-related case against Trump will move forward, according to court documents filed late Friday.
“The parties recognize the types of motions and briefing anticipated in pre-trial proceedings but have differing views on how the Court should schedule these matters and the manner in which they are to be conducted,” the joint filing said.
Smith argued the court should “first and foremost” make rulings tied to issues of presidential immunity as outlined by the Supreme Court, indicating the court should move forward with the case.
“The Government proposes that it file an opening brief in which it will explain why the immunity set forth in Trump does not apply to the categories of allegations in the superseding indictment or additional unpled categories of evidence that the Government intends to introduce at trial and will proffer in its brief,” prosecutors wrote.
Meanwhile, the former president’s legal team urged the court to give the parties more time to go over the potential legal questions and proposed a schedule that would bring the case into the spring or fall of 2025, about two years after the charges were first filed.
“President Trump holds the right to challenge the new indictment, and the underlying grand jury process, as a matter of law,” his team wrote, adding later, “We believe, and expect to demonstrate, that this case must end as a matter of law.”
The filing responds to U.S. District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan’s request for proposals from each side about how to proceed in the wake of July’s Supreme Court decision that granted Trump some presidential immunity from criminal prosecution.
The high court’s conservative majority ruled presidents and former presidents are immune from criminal prosecution for “official acts” they take during their presidency.
Some of the conduct alleged in Smith’s original indictment, such as Trump’s discussions with the Justice Department in the aftermath of the 2020 presidential election, was explicitly disqualified from the charges, according to the July opinion written by Chief Justice John Roberts. But other conduct, including interactions with campaign officials and private attorneys, could be examined.
It is now up to Chutkan to decide how to apply the Supreme Court’s ruling to the charges against Trump. But before she could weigh in, Smith secured a superseding indictment against the former president on Tuesday, in which prosecutors removed the alleged conduct deemed by Roberts to be covered by presidential immunity.
Trump still faces the same four federal counts — including conspiracy to defraud the U.S. — in a charging document that describes an alleged plot to subvert the results of the 2020 presidential election. Trump pleaded not guilty to the original 2023 indictment and has continued to deny any wrongdoing.
The new 36-page charging document is based on a more refined set of allegedly criminal acts, and prosecutors wrote it “reflects the government’s efforts to respect and implement the Supreme Court’s holdings.” Much of the conduct alleged in that first indictment remains in the new one, with notable exceptions, including the former president’s work with Justice Department officials and consultation with White House officials leading up to the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol attack.
Friday’s filing revealed Trump’s team intends to file additional motions to dismiss the new indictment based on claims that the former president remains immune from prosecution on portions of the conduct included in Smith’s latest indictment, including social media posts, public statements, communications with state officials and interactions with former Vice President Mike Pence. Chutkan has already denied a few of Trump’s requests to dismiss the case.
“The Special Counsel’s inability to rebut the presumption as to Pence is dispositive to this case. The special counsel will be unable to do so as a matter of law, thus rendering the remainder of the case moot,” Trump’s team wrote, seizing on Jack Smith’s decision to include the conduct related to the then-vice president in the new charging documents after the Supreme Court ruled those actions were “presumptively immune” from prosecution, but open to rebuttal.
Prosecutors are likely to argue they tailored the superseding indictment to comply with the Supreme Court’s ruling, so no further immunity should be conferred. They said they will seek to, “distinguish [Trump’s] private electioneering activity from official action, and rebut the presumption of immunity as to any conduct that the Court may deem official,” according to the new court filing.
Chutkan will now have to decide how to move the case forward in light of the Supreme Court’s decision and the new superseding indictment against Trump. A hearing is currently set for Sept. 5 in Washington, D.C., but Trump is not required to attend.
Notably, the former president’s legal team also wrote they intend to file motions to challenge the legality of Smith’s appointment and funding, a legal strategy that is likely to mirror that which they employed in the special counsel’s second federal case against Trump. U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon of Florida — who oversaw the classified documents case — decided in Trump’s favor last month when she ruled the special counsel’s appointment was invalid.
Smith has defended his appointment, and this week urged an appeals court to resurrect the case, writing Cannon’s ruling “took inadequate account” of history and arguing decades of legal precedent supported his appointment.
In an attempt to keep the proceedings moving forward, prosecutors proposed a schedule that would allow Chutkan to consider various legal issues on “parallel” tracks.
Watch CBS News
Be the first to know
Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.
Craig Newmark, the founder of online classified-ads site Craigslist, thinks the U.S. has a cybersecurity problem.
The entrepreneur turned philanthropist has pledged to donate $100 million to help safeguard the country from potential future cyberattacks, the Wall Street Journal first reported. Newmark will allocate $50 million to protect infrastructure, like power grids, from cyberattacks, including from foreign nations. The other half of his donation will be put toward educating the general public about how to safeguard their personal information, according to the report.
Newmark, 71, retired from the company he founded in 2018.
“The country is under attack,” Newmark told the Wall Street Journal. He said that cybersecurity experts who are working to protect the country from attack “need people to champion them.”
Today, many households make use of connected appliances or smart devices that can make them vulnerable to being hacked by criminals. At the corporate level, cyberattacks have become increasingly common.
“In the current cyberwar, the fight is on our own shores, and we all need to play an active role for the protection of our country and ourselves,” Newmark writes on his website.
In June, a hacking group took down CDK Global’s software platform, crippling auto dealerships across the U.S. CDK said that hackers demanded a ransom in order to restore its systems. In February, hackers infiltrated payments manager Change Healthcare, paralyzing segments of the U.S. Health care system. They are but two examples of the tremendous repercussions a cyberattack can have on an industry.
As part of his latest commitment, Newmark, who has pledged to give away nearly all of his wealth to charity, is making donations to a project out of the University of Chicago’s public policy school that trains cybersecurity volunteers to strengthen local infrastructure. Child internet-safety group Common Sense Media, is another beneficiary, according to the WSJ report.
The large majority of the $100 million pledge has not yet been allocated, and organizations can apply for donations through Newmark’s philanthropic organization, Craig Newmark Philanthropies.
On the foundation’s website, Newmark says he likes to donate to organizations that he believes in and lets them spend the money as they see fit. “Okay, what I do is find people who are really good at their jobs, and who can tolerate my sense of humor. I provide them with resources, and then get outta their way,” he states.
In addition to cybersecurity, other causes Newmark champions include support for military families and veterans, safeguarding trustworthy journalism and pigeon rescue.
PHIL LEO/Getty Images
Borrowers saddled with higher interest rates on everything from mortgages to credit cards received some welcome news on Wednesday when the Federal Reserve announced a half a percentage point cut to the federal funds rate. That brings the range down to 4.75% to 5.00%, a major reduction from the elevated position the range was frozen at for more than a year.
While it will take some time for that reduction to reverberate, it will inevitably make borrowing cheaper in the weeks and months to come. And with other cuts possible for when the Fed meets again in November and December, borrowing could become even more affordable by the end of the year.
That doesn’t mean, however, that borrowers stuck with high-interest-rate debt should wait for relief. There’s a strong argument to be made that these borrowers should take action now instead. Below, we’ll break down why.
Learn how the right debt relief service can help you here now.
Why borrowers shouldn’t wait for rate cuts to fix their debt
While waiting for rate cuts to echo throughout the economy may be tempting, particularly if you’re suffering from high-rate debt, that could be a mistake. Here’s why:
Rates may not fall dramatically
Credit card interest rates have surged in recent years, averaging over 20% right now. But those rates won’t fall as rapidly as they’ve grown. That’s because credit card rates are determined by a series of complex factors, only one of which is the federal funds rate. And even if credit card rates came down by the same half a percentage point that the federal funds rate did, that’s likely to make very little difference in what you have to pay each month, especially if you’re making minimum payments. So if you’re waiting for the Fed to help reduce what you have to pay on your credit card you could be waiting a very long time.
Start exploring your credit card debt relief options here instead.
Your debt will accrue in the interim
Even if you could rely on multiple rate cuts to come, your existing debt will continue to accrue interest and, possibly, penalties and fees if you’re already struggling to pay what you’ve borrowed. And if you can’t make adequate payments right now, it’ll become even more difficult to do so when dealing with a higher debt total (with compounded interest).
Take a multi-pronged approach
There are multiple debt relief options available right now. From debt consolidation loans to debt management programs to credit card debt forgiveness and even bankruptcy in extreme circumstances, there’s likely a path forward for you now. But that doesn’t mean that you still can’t try to position yourself to take advantage of lower rates. Since rate cuts have broad effects, you may be able to consolidate your debt with a debt consolidation loan now, for example, and then refinance it when rates drop later this year or in 2025. Just don’t sit idle, as debt, no matter the form, can quickly become debilitating if not properly addressed.
Speak with a debt relief servicer now who can help.
The bottom line
It’s never a good idea to let your debt accumulate, even if you’re confident that rate cuts on the horizon could help. Rate cuts, instead, will offer gradual relief, not the significant help you may need. Plus, your debt, fees and penalties will compound in the interim. Instead, consider taking a multi-pronged approach by researching a series of debt relief options that can help you now. And keep rate cuts in mind for the future when you may be able to capitalize by refinancing instead.