By Annie Grayer, Katelyn Polantz
4分钟前
发布于 2026年3月25日，美国东部时间下午3:57
联邦机构 | 唐纳德·特朗普 | 特朗普法律案件 | 国会新闻
[查看全部主题]
Facebook 推特 电子邮件 链接 话题
链接已复制！
美国国会众议院司法委员会于2026年1月22日在华盛顿特区举行的听证会上，美国众议员杰米·拉斯金（民主党，马里兰州）就前特别顾问杰克·史密斯对美国总统唐纳德·特朗普的刑事调查发表讲话。
Kevin Lamarque/路透社
民主党众议员杰米·拉斯金在一封新信中声称，司法部最新公布的文件显示，检察官曾考虑过唐纳德·特朗普在其第一个任期结束后是否不当保留了与其商业利益相关的机密材料。
拉斯金表示，司法部在提交给国会的一批材料中透露了这一考虑，这些材料涉及特别顾问杰克·史密斯针对特朗普的机密文件案。但拉斯金对这一披露的断言立即遭到了白宫新闻秘书卡罗琳·利维特的迅速反驳，后者于周三声称，这位国会议员正在利用“不真实且低俗的指控”，这些指控与针对特朗普的指控无关。另一位熟悉此案的消息人士告诉美国有线电视新闻网（CNN），对特朗普商业利益的考虑是“推测性的”，最终并未在刑事案件中发挥重要作用。
不过，拉斯金表示，这些披露引发了重要问题。他指责司法部可能违反了法律，向国会分享了一名联邦法官禁止公开的与机密文件案相关的文件。今年早些时候，一名由特朗普任命的联邦法官阻止了史密斯关于特朗普涉嫌处理机密记录的最终报告的发布。
司法部披露引发的担忧
在给司法部长帕姆·邦迪的信中，拉斯金称司法部于3月13日向众议院司法委员会提供了几份与案件相关的文件，其中包括“显然被禁止公开”的非公开信息，因为艾琳·坎农法官下令将这些材料封存。
“一份文件中很大一部分页面标有‘包含6(e)和密封材料’——根据法律，司法部检察官向第三方（包括国会）披露此类材料是犯罪行为。这份文件不仅似乎确实包含大陪审团材料，还抹杀了政府在坎农法官面前的论点。”拉斯金写道。“6e”材料指的是大陪审团信息，其命名源于严格禁止其公开的法律。
这一说法正值司法部最近在法庭上辩称，史密斯在刑事起诉书中披露的信息之外，还有更多信息应该保密。
拉斯金认为，司法部向国会共和党人披露这些信息是对调查特朗普的检察官进行“报复运动”的一部分，并声称司法部最近向众议院司法委员会提供的材料是“精心挑选的”。
但拉斯金也指出了材料中可能对特朗普不利的断言。
“显然，你们被疯狂寻找任何可以扭曲和歪曲以攻击特别顾问史密斯的证据（尽管总是一无所获）蒙蔽了双眼，却惊人地忽略了一个事实：你们提供的一些文件包含对你们老板行为的不利证据，可能违反了你们司法部和唐纳德·特朗普向坎农法官要求的禁令。”拉斯金写道。
例如，司法部提交给国会的一份备忘录记录了检察官和联邦调查局（FBI）如何确定从海湖庄园搜出的机密文件是否可能与特朗普的财务交易有关。
“联邦调查局此后已经发现——机密文件与特朗普卸任后创建的文件混杂在一起，并且存在与某些商业利益相关的机密文件。”根据CNN审查的一份副本，该备忘录中提到。
备忘录还描述了可能有助于加强案件并成为故意行为证据的因素。
其中一个因素是：“特朗普持有与其商业利益相关的机密文件——这为保留这些文件建立了动机。我们必须获取这些文件。”
史密斯办公室的检察官从未在法庭上辩称特朗普的商业是其动机的一部分，这一理论在特朗普保留其第一任总统任期内某些机密文件是否与其商业利益相关的问题上，从未成为其被指控的刑事不当处理和妨碍司法公正的核心。
据熟悉史密斯调查的人士透露，联邦调查局发现了一份或多份与特朗普可能存在商业利益关系的国家相关文件。但这只是一个推测性的调查途径，对案件本身并没有太大作用。
针对特朗普的机密文件案于2024年在佛罗里达州一名由特朗普任命的法官决定史密斯办公室没有起诉权之前的审判前结束。法官艾琳·坎农裁定该办公室缺乏国会授权。
拉斯金还写道，这些文件强化了特朗普被指控隐瞒的材料的敏感性。
在备忘录中，检察官写道，特朗普保留的文件是“高度敏感的”，“只有总统和拥有最高敏感度权限的官员才能接触到的文件类型”，其中一份文件可能只有包括总统在内的六个人能够接触。
与国会分享的文件还声称，现在特朗普的首席幕僚苏西·怀尔斯在特朗普据称向机上人员展示机密地图时也在飞机上。根据拉斯金的信，当时她担任特朗普超级政治行动委员会（PAC）的首席执行官。调查人员已知对特朗普据称向包括怀尔斯在内的其他人展示包含机密信息的地图进行了审查。
拉斯金要求邦迪回答一系列问题，包括特朗普还向谁展示了地图，以及哪些文件如此敏感以至于整个联邦政府只有六个人能够接触到。
拉斯金还呼吁邦迪在4月14日前根据所有关于大陪审团保密的规定，公布所有剩余的调查材料。
司法部在其声明中表示：“（杰克·史密斯的）文件包含对特朗普总统的不真实指控不足为奇。拉斯金提出的指控毫无根据。坎农法官的保护令未被违反，司法部提交的文件中没有任何违反6(e)规定的内容，也没有披露大陪审团相关的事项。”
根据CNN审查的文件，一些与国会分享的材料标有“特权及机密，包含6(e)和密封材料”。司法部表示，标有“6e”的文件对任何6(e)材料都进行了编辑。
与此同时，白宫发言人阿比盖尔·杰克逊表示，总统“没有做错任何事，这就是为什么他轻松击败了拜登司法部针对他的前所未有的法律战，然后以压倒性优势赢得了近8000万张选票的选举胜利。”
另一项涉嫌不当披露
随着国会山共和党人继续施压史密斯办公室的工作，特别顾问针对特朗普的调查记录中受法院命令保密的问题正变得愈发突出。
虽然拉斯金指责司法部可能向众议院司法委员会不当披露了法院机密信息，但两名曾担任特别顾问高级副手的前联邦检察官指控司法部向参议院司法委员会不当披露了史密斯调查中的法院机密信息。
史密斯的副手JP·库尼和另一名高级前检察官莫莉·加斯顿于11月向司法部监察长提出正式申诉，称该部门可能不当向参议院公布了近200份大陪审团传票。根据他们向CNN披露的申诉，他们声称只有司法部官员才能接触到这些传票。
司法部发言人表示，参议院司法委员会主席查克·格拉斯利获得的文件中没有任何大陪审团材料，而且史密斯调查的材料是“合法披露”的。
然而，国会山的共和党人表示，史密斯办公室的检察官在文件中披露的内容是错误的，认为检察官不应该在追踪2021年1月6日国会大厦骚乱期间国会议员的联系时使用典型的调查技术。
司法部检察官未经法庭批准不得披露大陪审团记录，而像史密斯最终报告第二卷这样被封存的法庭记录，任何持有这些文件的一方都需要法官批准才能披露。
国会享有极大的宪法保护，不受大陪审团保密规则或法院对其在自身调查中获取的司法部文件的命令约束。
史密斯团队受大陪审团保密规则和法院封存令的约束，因此在最近的国会听证会上拒绝详细讨论其调查的某些部分，以免面临刑事起诉。
特朗普多次呼吁其司法部追究包括史密斯在内的政治对手。
联邦机构 | 唐纳德·特朗普 | 特朗普法律案件 | 国会新闻
[查看全部主题]
Facebook 推特 电子邮件 链接 话题
链接已复制！
广告反馈
Democrats revive allegations around Trump classified document case in latest political battle with Justice Department
By Annie Grayer, Katelyn Polantz
4 min ago
PUBLISHED Mar 25, 2026, 3:57 PM ET
Federal agencies Donald Trump Trump legal cases Congressional news
[See all topics]
Facebook TweetEmailLink Threads
Link Copied!
U.S. Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) speaks during a hearing of the House Judiciary Committee about Former Special Counsel Jack Smith’s criminal investigation of U.S. President Donald Trump, on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., on January 22, 2026.
Kevin Lamarque/Reuters
Democratic Rep. Jamie Raskin asserted in a new letter that newly released Justice Department files show that prosecutors once considered whether President Donald Trump had improperly retained classified material relevant to his business interests after his first term.
Raskin said the Justice Department had revealed the consideration in a batch of material it turned over to Congress on Special Counsel Jack Smith’s classified documents case against Trump. But Raskin’s assertions about the disclosure drew swift and immediate pushback from White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, who asserted on Wednesday the congressman was seizing on “untrue and salacious claims” that were not a part of the charges against Trump. And a separate source familiar with the case told CNN the consideration of Trump’s business interests was “speculative” and did not ultimately play a major role in the criminal case.
Raskin, though, said the disclosures raised important questions. And he accused the Department of Justice of potentially breaking the law by sharing documents with Congress related to the classified documents case that had been barred from release by a federal judge. Earlier this year, a Trump-appointed federal judge blocked the release of Smith’s final report on Trump’s alleged mishandling of classified records.
Ad Feedback
Raskin’s letter is the latest salvo in a simmering dispute with Republicans who want to discredit Smith and his prosecutions of Trump. Democrats argue the documents both underscore politicized releases of information by the Justice Department and shed more light on Trump’s alleged mishandling of classified documents. Trump has long said the case against him was part of a broader political attack from the left and repeatedly denied any wrongdoing, and the Justice Department called Raskin’s letter a “cheap political stunt” which contained “baseless” accusations.
Concerns over DOJ’s releases
In the letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi, Raskin said that DOJ provided several documents related to the case to the House Judiciary Committee on March 13 that included non-public information “apparently barred from release” because Judge Aileen Cannon had ordered the material to remain under seal .
“A significant portion of the pages in one production are marked ‘Contains 6(e) and Sealed Material’—material that would be a crime for DOJ prosecutors to disclose to third parties, including to Congress. This document not only seemingly actually contains grand jury material, it obliterates the government’s own argument before Judge Cannon,” Raskin wrote. “6e” material refers to grand jury information and is named after the law that strictly prohibits it from becoming public.
The assertion comes as the Justice Department has also argued recently in court that more information than what was revealed by Smith in the criminal indictments should stay secret.
Raskin argued that DOJ made the latest disclosure to congressional Republicans as part of a “campaign of retribution” against the prosecutors who conducted the federal probes into Trump and claimed that the release that DOJ recently made to the House Judiciary Committee was “cherry-picked.”
But Raskin also pointed to assertions in the material that might be damaging for Trump.
“Apparently blinded by the frenzied search to find any scrap of evidence that could be twisted and distorted to level an attack against Special Counsel Smith (despite constantly coming up empty-handed), you have, quite amazingly, missed the fact that some of the documents you provided include damning evidence about your boss’s conduct and may well violate the gag order your DOJ and Donald Trump demanded from Judge Aileen Cannon,” Raskin wrote.
A memorandum DOJ turned over to Congress, for example, captures how the prosecutors and FBI were determining if classified documents recovered from Mar-a-Lago could have related to Trump’s financial dealings.
“FBI has already since found both—that classified documents were commingled with documents created after Trump left office and that there are classified documents that would be pertinent to certain business interests,” the memo said, according to a copy reviewed by CNN.
The memo also described possible factors that could aid in strengthening the case and become evidence of willfulness.
One factor, the memo said: “Trump possessed classified documents pertinent to his business interests—establishing a motive for retaining them. We must have those documents.”
The theory that Trump had a business interest in some of the classified documents he kept from his first presidency never become central to the criminal mishandling and obstruction charges Smith brought in court against the former president. And prosecutors from Smith’s office never argued in court Trump’s business was part of motives.
A vehicle drives past the Department of Justice building in Washington, D.C., on February 9, 2022.
Stafani Reynolds/AFP/Getty Images
The FBI had found a document or documents that related to a country Trump might have had a business interest in, according to a person familiar with the Smith investigation. But it was a speculative investigative avenue, and never amounted to much for the case itself, the person told CNN.
The classified documents case against Trump ended in 2024 prior to a trial, when a Trump-appointed judge in Florida decided Smith’s office didn’t have prosecutorial authority. The Judge, Aileen Cannon, decided the office lacked congressional approval.
Raskin also wrote that the documents reinforced the sensitive nature of what Trump was alleged to have withheld.
In the memorandum, prosecutors wrote that Trump retained documents that were “highly sensitive” and “the type of documents that only presidents and officials with the most sensitive authority have,” with one document only accessible by potentially just six people, including the president.
The documents shared with Congress also assert that Susie Wiles, now Trump’s chief of staff, was on a plane when Trump allegedly showed a classified map to individuals on board. At the time, she was serving as the CEO of Trump’s Super PAC, according to Raskin’s letter. Investigators were known to have scrutinized Trump’s alleged showing of a map that contained classified information to others, including Wiles.
Raskin asked Bondi to respond to a host of questions, including who else Trump showed the map to and what documents were so sensitive that only six people in the entire federal government had access to them.
Raskin also called on Bondi to release all remaining investigative materials by April 14 subject to all rules regarding grand jury secrecy.
The Justice Department said in its statement that “it is no surprise that (Jack Smith’s) files contain salacious and untrue claims about President Trump. The accusations Raskin makes are baseless. Judge Cannon’s protective order was not violated, and none of the documents produced by DOJ violated 6e as none of them disclosed matters occurring before a grand jury.”
Some of the materials shared with Congress contain the label: “Privileged & Confidential, Contains 6(e) and Sealed Material” according to documents reviewed by CNN. The Justice Department said “documents marked ‘6e’ contained redactions of any 6e material.”
Abigail Jackson, a White House spokesperson, meanwhile, said that the president “did nothing wrong, which is why he easily defeated the Biden DOJ’s unprecedented lawfare campaign against him and then won nearly 80 million votes in a landslide election victory.”
Another alleged improper disclosure
The issue of court-ordered secrecy around investigative records from the special counsel’s investigations of Trump are becoming more of an issue as Capitol Hill Republicans continue to press on Smith’s office’s work.
While Raskin accused DOJ of potentially improperly disclosing court secrets to the House Judiciary Committee, two former federal prosecutors who were top deputies of the special counsel have accused DOJ of improperly disclosing court secrets from the Smith investigation to the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Smith’s deputy, JP Cooney, and another top former prosecutor Molly Gaston made a formal complaint in November to the Justice Department inspector general, saying the department may have improperly released nearly 200 grand jury subpoenas to the Senate. They claim only Justice Department officials would have had access to the subpoenas, according to the complaint they made, which was reviewed by CNN.
A Justice Department spokesperson said none of the documents obtained by Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley disclosed grand jury material, and that material from Smith’s investigation now in the Senate’s possession was “lawfully disclosed.”
Republicans on Capitol Hill, however, say prosecutors under Smith were in the wrong for what’s revealed in the documents, arguing the prosecutors shouldn’t have used typical investigative techniques in tracing members of Congress’ contacts around the Capitol riot on January 6, 2021.
Justice Department prosecutors are bound from disclosing grand jury records without court approval, and court records that are under seal, like Volume II of Smith’s final report, would need a judge’s approval to be disclosed by any party who might have the documents.
Congress enjoys immense Constitutional protections and wouldn’t be bound by grand jury secrecy rules or court orders on Justice Department documents they obtain in their own investigations.
Smith’s team is bound by grand jury secrecy rules and court sealing orders and thus has declined to speak in more detail about parts of their investigation during recent congressional testimony, out of fear of criminal prosecution.
Trump has repeatedly called for his Justice Department to pursue his political enemies, including Smith.
Federal agencies Donald Trump Trump legal cases Congressional news
[See all topics]
Facebook TweetEmailLink Threads
Link Copied!
Ad Feedback