Jack Smith uses 'out-there' legal reasoning that has caused him to lose cases, WSJ says

The Wall Street Journal argued in a piece on Monday that Trump Special Counsel Jack Smith has a "mixed record" of winning cases because he sometimes relies on obscure reasoning and legal theories that judges and juries have a hard time following.

In the two cases against former President Donald Trump that Smith is prosecuting, "Smith is relying on theories that present legal questions that some experts say could go either way in court," the outlet said.

Some former prosecutors told the Journal that they think Smith's case against Trump blurs the lines between which of Trump's actions are looked at as wrong and which ones are criminal.

It's not a crime to claim that he won the election when he did not, they argued, but it could be a crime to pursue "unlawful means of discounting legitimate votes and subverting the election results.”

And they don't think Smith does a good job drawing a line between the two.

That's because Smith is blinded by his hatred for Trump, and it has led him to confuse the issue of whether the former president actually committed crimes worthy of being charged and punished -- or not.