Nauta, Co-Defendant of Trump, Alleges Unfair Targeting by DOJ

According to Walt Nauta, a valet for former President Donald Trump and co-defendant in Trump’s federal classified documents case, the Department of Justice (DOJ) targeted him because he invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination during the initial stages of the investigation.

Nauta’s lawyers alleged in documents unsealed by Judge Aileen Cannon of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida that he was unfairly singled out by the DOJ, as reported by the Washington Examiner on Monday. These documents were related to a motion filed by Nauta’s lawyers to dismiss the charges against him.

Nauta faces five criminal charges, including conspiracy to obstruct justice, concealing a document, scheming to conceal a material fact in a federal investigation, and lying to the FBI. He has pleaded not guilty to all charges.

In the past week, Judge Cannon has unsealed several previously undisclosed filings and indicated that three of Trump’s arguments for dismissal, filed in February, will also be unsealed by Thursday, including one regarding selective and vindictive prosecution.

In his motion to dismiss, Nauta claimed that he had been fully cooperative with federal investigators until a casual meeting between his attorney Stanley Woodward and David Raskin, who represented special counsel Jack Smith in May 2022. According to an unsealed document, Raskin demanded Nauta’s full cooperation in the classified documents investigation during this seemingly informal meeting.

Nauta’s attorneys stated that despite discussing only one potential charge at the meeting, more charges were unexpectedly brought against Nauta in a target letter he later received, attributing this to the “animus” caused by the meeting. They argued that this led to Smith pressing charges against Nauta, even though others had engaged in similar conduct regarding moving Trump’s classified documents.

In a newly unsealed response, prosecutors countered Nauta’s claim of selective prosecution by comparing his conduct to that of two other individuals employed by Trump, whose actions were not similar to Nauta’s.