A CNN legal analyst claims that Special Counsel Jack Smith broke rules to secure a "cheap shot" against Trump prior to the election.

A legal analyst argued in a New York Magazine piece that special counsel Jack Smith "deviated from standard practice" by targeting former President Trump after the election, rather than trying the candidate beforehand.

In Elie Honig's "Jack Smith's October Cheap Shot" essay on CNN, the senior legal analyst analyzed the decision made by Jack Smith to drop a 165-page federal court filing concerning the issue of Trump's immunity from prosecution.

Judge Tanya Chutkan granted Smith permission to file a 180-page long brief, which is four times the normal maximum, according to Honig.

Despite earlier efforts to expedite Trump's immunity and get it in before November 5, Chutkan now claims she does not care about the upcoming election. After redacting several names, she complied with Smith's request and made the rest of the brief public.

Smith has abandoned any pretense and is willing to bend any rule or switch up on any practice as long as it helps him harm Trump's electoral prospects. There is no defending Smith's conduct on any principled or institutional basis.

Smith's "unprincipled, norm-breaking practice" does not justify suggestions that voters should have the utmost information about presidential candidates before casting their ballot.

According to Honig, Smith violated standard criminal procedure and federal rules by asking Chutkan to file an indictment without a pending defense motion.

Honig continued, "Smith's request to file first was 'procedurally irregular,' and Trump's team objected. The judge acknowledged this before ruling in Smith's favor, as she has done at virtually every consequential turn."

Smith's proactive filing is "prejudicial" to Trump in the legal and political sense, but also ironic because Smith previously complained that Trump's words might taint the jury pool for the case.

Smith has disclosed a substantial document with potentially damaging statements about a criminal defendant, which was created using grand-jury testimony that is typically kept confidential at this stage of the case and was not subjected to the rules of evidence or cross-examination.

Smith's behavior, according to Honig, goes against the fundamental principles and policies of the Department of Justice (DOJ).

If prosecutors compromise their principles based on the target's identity, they have no principles.

In the unsealed filing, Smith argued that Trump is not immune from the remaining allegations against him and presented his case for why Trump should be tried for his private crimes.

Planet Chronicle Digital reached out to the Justice Department for comment.

Trump has pleaded not guilty to all charges brought against him by Smith.