The federal judge overseeing the case of former President Donald J. Trump’s classified documents rejected an effort by one of his co-defendants to dismiss the charges, claiming vindictive prosecution. The co-defendant, Walt Nauta, accused prosecutors of indicting him unfairly for refusing to testify against Mr. Trump. However, Judge Aileen M. Cannon ruled that there was no evidence to suggest charges were brought to punish him.
The indictment alleges that Mr. Nauta conspired with Mr. Trump to hide classified materials removed from the White House. Prosecutors claim Mr. Nauta participated in a plot to destroy security footage and lied to investigators. Despite claims of a biased prosecution, the judge denied the motion, stating it was unfounded.
A meeting at the Justice Department where prosecutors allegedly tried to coerce cooperation was disputed by Mr. Bratt’s colleague, David Harbach. Judge Cannon sought a middle ground, acknowledging Mr. Woodward’s allegations without inferring misconduct by prosecutors. The Justice Department’s internal watchdog is investigating.
Mr. Trump has also filed a vindictive prosecution motion, accusing prosecutors of targeting him unfairly. Judge Cannon has yet to rule on Mr. Trump’s motion but maintains that rejecting Mr. Nauta’s motion does not comment on the merits of the former president’s claims.
Judge Cannon is carefully considering motions filed by both Mr. Trump and his co-defendants to dismiss the charges. Recent developments have seen Mr. Trump’s legal team seeking immunity from prosecution based on a Supreme Court ruling protecting him from criminal charges related to actions taken while in office.
