Federal prosecutors have pushed back against an effort by alleged Trump assassination attempt suspect Cole Tomas Allen to remove top Department of Justice officials from his case, with U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro arguing the request is “drastic” and falls “far short” of the legal standard required for disqualification.
Attorney’s for Allen had asked U.S. District Judge Trevor McFadden, a Trump appointee overseeing the proceedings, to disqualify Pirro and Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche from direct involvement in the prosecution given that they were present at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner in Washington, D.C where the incident took place in April.
In a filing submitted Friday, Pirro urged the court to reject Allen’s motion seeking to bar her and Blanche and potentially other Justice Department officials from taking part in the prosecution.
Cole, 31, from Torrence, California, has been charged with trying to assassinate the president, attacking a U.S. officer or employee with a deadly weapon, transporting a firearm and ammunition across state lines to commit a felony, and firing a gun during a violent crime.
Neither the president nor any of the cabinet were harmed in the incident.
Prosecutors Reject Conflict Claims
Allen’s attorneys had argued earlier this month that Pirro and Blanche should be removed from the case because both were present at the Washington Hilton Hotel on April 25 when the attack took place.
Allen allegedly ran through a security checkpoint and fired a shotgun at a Secret Service officer while attendees, including Pirro and Blanche, were inside attending the White House Correspondents’ Dinner. One officer was struck in a bullet-resistant vest before Allen was subdued and arrested. Investigators allege Allen was carrying a shotgun, a pistol, six knives, ammunition and shotgun cartridges at the time of his arrest.
Defense attorneys Eugene Ohm and Tezira Abe, assistant federal public defenders representing Allen, argued that prosecutors could attempt to portray administration officials as intended targets of the alleged attack, potentially making Pirro and Blanche “purported victims or witnesses” in the case.
Newsweek has contacted Ohm and Abe for comment via email outside of regular working hours.
“As this case proceeds closer to trial, the country and the world will continue to wonder–how can the American justice system permit a victim to prosecute a criminal defendant in a case involving them?,” the defense attorneys wrote in their motion.
The lawyers also pointed to Pirro’s longstanding relationship with Trump, writing that the pair “have spent Thanksgivings together and have traveled on his jet for weekends in Florida,” which they argued created further concerns over impartiality.
In Friday’s response, Pirro rejected the argument that either she or Blanche had any legally meaningful conflict of interest. Quoting prior case law, Pirro wrote that the “burden of proof to disqualify Government counsel is extraordinarily high” and that removing federal prosecutors is considered “a drastic measure.”
She added that courts could “only rarely—if ever—imagine a scenario in which a district court could properly disqualify an entire United States Attorney’s Office.”
Pirro’s filing also challenged the broader logic of the defense’s argument, writing: “Are the Amtrak passengers who sat next to the defendant while he surreptitiously transported guns and ammunition across the country victims? What about the other law enforcement officers who were helping to secure the event when the defendant made his failed charge and fired his shotgun?”
“Does each and every attendee at the Dinner have a disqualifying conflict of interest? What about their family members? The answer to these questions is ‘no.’”
Pirro argued that while some individuals present at the dinner may qualify as victims “in a colloquial sense,” that did not amount to a legal conflict requiring recusal.
Allen’s legal team had suggested that appointing a special prosecutor could be appropriate in the case. The defense argued that ethical rules require prosecutors to remain impartial and avoid participating in cases where conflicts could undermine confidence in the justice system.
“Here, there is—at the very least—the appearance of partiality that necessitates the recusal of U.S. Attorney Pirro and Acting A.G. Blanche,” Allen’s attorneys wrote.
But Pirro’s filing dismissed the defense motion as relying on little more than media coverage and speculation.
“In an attempt to meet this high burden, defendant Cole Allen’s Motion to Disqualify United States Attorney, et al. … cites a smattering of press clippings about U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro and Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche and argues that they suffer disqualifying conflicts of interest as victims, witnesses, and friends,” the filing stated.
Pirro concluded that neither official qualifies as a victim or witness “in any legally meaningful way.”
“The fact that happenstance delivered them to the Dinner when the defendant made his assassination attempt does not disqualify them from now prosecuting him,” the filing said.
Read the full article here
