Former Reagan Justice Department chief of staff Mark Levin criticized Special Counsel Jack Smith's 37-count indictment against former President Donald Trump, arguing it lacks crucial components of typical document mishandling cases. Levin, who served as the top staffer for Attorney General Edwin Meese III, questioned the absence of evidence demonstrating Trump destroyed or significantly mishandled classified information.

Levin highlighted Smith's history of overzealous prosecutions, citing the case of former Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell, whose conviction on honest services fraud and illegal gift acceptance was later overturned by the Supreme Court. He also pointed to the mistrial in the campaign finance case against former Senator John Edwards.

Levin argued that if Trump had committed a serious offense like destroying or altering classified documents, Smith would have emphasized those allegations. Instead, the indictment focuses on the movement of boxes and alleged discussions about getting rid of documents, without any evidence of actual destruction. Levin contrasted this with Hillary Clinton's destruction of 30,000 sensitive documents, for which she was not indicted.

Other legal experts, including Bush Deputy Assistant Attorney General John Yoo, raised constitutional concerns about the indictment, particularly regarding separation of powers and presidential authority. Yoo questioned the lack of clarity on who made the decision to indict, emphasizing that President Biden, Trump's political rival, is ultimately responsible. He described the situation as unprecedented, given that it involves indicting a leading candidate of a major political party.

Levin suggested a more appropriate course of action would have been to contact Trump and request the return of the documents, rather than pursuing an indictment. On "The Five," Judge Jeanine Pirro criticized Smith's prosecutorial record, citing the McDonnell and Edwards cases as examples of his failures.