Trump court cases

Jack Smith opens with The Government moves to modify defendant Donald J. Trump’s conditions of release, to make clear that he may not make statements that pose a significant, imminent, and foreseeable danger to law enforcement agents participating in the investigation and prosecution of this case.
He then informs the court that he met and conferred with Trump’s lawyers, who oppose his motion, and also said they object to the timing - seeing as it’s a holiday weekend and as we all know, Trump observes Memorial Day because he really cares about all those suckers and losers we’ve lost in battle. I digress.

Jack Smith goes on to say Those statements create a grossly misleading impression about the intentions and conduct of federal law enforcement agents—falsely suggesting that they were complicit in a plot to assassinate him—and expose those agents, some of whom will be witnesses at trial, to the risk of threats, violence, and harassment. The Court has an “independent obligation to protect the integrity of this judicial proceeding,” ECF No. 101, and should take steps immediately to halt this dangerous campaign to smear law enforcement.
...

And here’s the kicker: the policy that Trump is citing as evidence that the government intended to use deadly force states the following: “[l]aw enforcement officers of the Department of Justice may use deadly force only when necessary, that is, when the officer has a reasonable belief that the subject of such force poses an imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to the officer or to another person.”

I highlight “only” because Trump’s lawyers misquoted that, removing the word “only” in their motion to dismiss - and his lawyers are former DoJ employees. So that’s just completely unacceptable, and IMHO, sanctionable.