The federal judge prosecuting Donald Trump on charges of possessing classified documents agreed Monday to remove from the indictment a passage about an episode in which the former president brandished classified documents at a club in Bedminster, New Jersey.
U.S. District Judge Eileen Cannon ruled to remove the phrase, saying Trump had not been charged with the conduct it described and that it could unfairly prejudice jurors if they were to later see it at trial.
Cannon’s ruling is closely watched because it could indicate how he will rule on future motions to suppress evidence as Trump seeks to limit the scope of evidence prosecutors can present, thereby dramatically weakening his case.
Legal experts said the move to remove the clause was unusual.
Judge Cannon ruled that the sentence should be struck down, relying in part on a federal rule that says evidence of other crimes cannot be used to imply a defendant’s nefariousness when presenting evidence of motive.
Prosecutors from Special Counsel Jack Smith’s office argued they included the passage because they were permitted to do so under Part II of the attorney general’s rules, but Cannon disputed the fact that Trump has not been charged with the conduct described in the passage.
The passage in question (paragraph 36) uses vague language, but according to sources familiar with the matter, it depicts President Trump brandishing a classified map of Afghanistan in 2021 while criticizing a U.S. withdrawal to Suzie Wiles, who is now his 2024 presidential campaign manager.
“In August or September 2021, after leaving office, Mr. Trump met with representatives of a political action committee (“PAC Representatives”) at his Bedminster Club offices. During the meeting, Mr. Trump remarked that ongoing military operations were not going well,” the paragraph states.
“Trump showed the PAC representative a classified map of Country B and told the PAC representative not to show the map and not to get too close. The PAC representative did not have a security clearance and did not have classified information on a need-to-know basis regarding military operations.”
Canon’s Movement A broader decision on page 14There, she rejected Trump’s request to dismiss the obstruction charges.
Cannon wrote that a large part of the reason for dismissing Trump’s motion is because his allegations are factual matters that should be raised as part of the defense’s arguments at trial and are not grounds for dismissing the indictment, as opposed to legal matters that can be ruled on before trial.
