James Trusty, a former chief of the Justice Department’s organized crime unit, has raised concerns about the integrity of the current Department of Justice (DOJ).
As reported by Fox News, Trusty’s remarks come in light of allegations against Assistant U.S. Attorney for Delaware, Lesley Wolf, who reportedly tipped off Hunter Biden’s legal team about potential scrutiny on a storage unit Biden had used. Trusty labeled such actions as potential “obstruction of justice.”
Furthermore, Trusty highlighted another concerning incident related to the Special Counsel Jack Smith’s investigation into the alleged mishandling of classified information at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate. According to reports, Stanley Woodward, the defense attorney representing Walt Nauta (Trump’s valet), was allegedly pressured by federal prosecutor Jay Bratt. Bratt, who heads the counterintelligence and export-control section of the DOJ’s National Security Division, reportedly insinuated that Woodward’s application for a federal judgeship might be viewed more favorably if his client, Nauta, cooperated against Trump. Trusty described this as “extortion.”
Trusty further commented on the shifting of the grand jury investigation from Washington to Miami, suggesting that there might be more to the story than meets the eye. He emphasized that a grand jury investigation wouldn’t typically be moved to another district after a year unless there were underlying reasons.
Mark Levin, the host, also weighed in on the matter, expressing concerns about the tactics employed by Special Counsel Jack Smith. Levin pointed out that Smith has a history of piercing attorney-client privilege and presenting it to grand juries.
James Trusty, who had previously been a part of Trump’s legal team but withdrew in June, expressed hope that Trump’s current legal team would address these discrepancies in court. Legal expert Jonathan Turley also shared his views, suggesting that the indictment against Nauta seems to be a strategy to pressure him into cooperating against Trump.
The unfolding events have raised several questions about the integrity and transparency of the DOJ’s actions, especially in politically sensitive cases.
