Donald Trump may have a problem on his hands, but that problem will not come with a lot of scrutiny from conservatives and right-wing media.
A security aide who was backing Trump in this classified documents investigation has flipped.
After changing attorneys, the aide has recanted his previous testimony and is now giving up the tapes on Trump, reported Axios.
Special Counsel Jack Smith appears to be putting on the squeeze play.
According to the transcripts, “Trump Employee 4” told the grand jury that he was unaware of any attempt by Trump to erase surveillance videos.
That employee has been identified in some reports as Yuscil Taveras, who held the title of director of information technology at Mar-a-Lago.
Now, Taveras is telling Smith a detailed account of Trump tampering with the evidence related to the investigation.
As a result of the reversal by Taveras, Smith has filed additional charges against Trump.
Judge Cannon, a Trump-appointed judge presiding over the case, has been all over Smith for having a DC grand jury continue to gather information regarding the case.
Smith told Cannon that the DC grand jury was officially dismissed, but that means it was still operating for weeks after the indictment was handed down.
Since Tavaras’ former attorney was also representing Nauta, another defendant in the cases.
Prosecutors wrote, “The Government anticipates calling Trump Employee 4 as a trial witness and expects that he will testify to conduct alleged in the superseding indictment regarding efforts to delete security footage.
“Trump Employee 4 will very likely face cross-examination about his prior inconsistent statements in his grand jury testimony, which occurred while Mr. Woodward represented him, and which he disavowed immediately after obtaining new counsel,” reported Politico.
When Woodward suggested that the way to avoid the conflict would be to not call Tavaras, Assistant Special Counsel David Harbach responded.
He stated, “The Government is unaware of one, in which a court has excluded evidence to avoid a conflict on facts remotely similar to this case, where the Government put Mr. Woodward on notice long ago about potential conflicts, and he is now seeking to affirmatively use those conflicts to gain a tactical advantage at trial by excluding highly incriminating evidence to the benefit of not only his own client but also a co-defendant [Trump] whose PAC is paying his legal fees.”