"[Jack Smith] may be right about obtaining a conviction before a D.C. jury and a highly motivated judge against Trump. However..."

"... he would not have been able to sustain any conviction — and this [new] report makes that abundantly clear. Smith repeats the same conclusory evidence, such as citing how Trump said 'fight' ten times in his January 6th speech. He minimized the immunity decision by removing some evidence but kept largely the original indictment. However, the treatment of the obstruction claims was the most telling and indicative of Smith, who has repeatedly lost cases due to overextending constitutional and statutory authority. The Supreme Court’s decision in Fischer v. United States rejecting the use of obstruction of legal proceedings against January 6th defendants will potentially impact hundreds of cases.... One of those cases that will be impacted is the pending prosecution of former president Donald Trump who is facing four charges, including two obstruction counts. It was not clear if Special Counsel Jack Smith would yield to the decision or possibly take the dubious path laid out by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson in her concurrence...."

Writes Jonathan Turley, in "Jacksonian Obstruction: Smith Explains How He Was Planning to Circumvent the Decision in Fischer."