Trump's 2020 Election Case: What Jack Smith's New File Argues | News about the 2024 US election

U.S. federal prosecutors on Wednesday unveiled their most comprehensive case against former President Donald Trump, focusing on his attempts to overturn the 2020 election results.

The lengthy legal brief detailing the government's allegations was released by U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, who is overseeing the high-profile criminal charges against Trump.

“When the defendant lost the 2020 presidential election, he resorted to crime to remain in office,” special counsel Jack Smith wrote in the 165-page brief.

“Although the defendant was the sitting president during the charged conspiracies, his plan was fundamentally private in nature,” he added.

That Trump acted in a private capacity in attempting to overturn the election results is the core of the argument Smith attempts to make in his filing. In July, the Supreme Court ruled that presidents enjoy immunity for all official actions taken while in office.

Smith's new filing argues that Trump remains on trial for his efforts to overturn President Joe Biden's election victory because his actions were not in his capacity as president but rather to advance his campaign's interests.

Here are some key takeaways from the submission.

'So what?': Trump on Pence's safety at risk

On January 6, 2021, when a riotous mob of Trump supporters attacked the Capitol in Washington, DC, to overturn Congress' certification of Biden's victory, some of them chanted slogans suggesting they wanted to hang Vice President Mike Pence .

Pence had refused to comply with Trump's demand that the vice president, as leader of the US Senate, send the list of voters back to various states so that they can be checked by their legislatures. Trump claimed there was widespread voter fraud in the election – an allegation that has since been repeatedly rejected by multiple courts.

According to Smith's filing, after a Trump adviser told the president that Pence's safety was at risk, Trump responded: “So what?”

The Secret Service had to evacuate Pence and several members of Congress because of fears that they would be physically attacked by the crowd.

Meanwhile, Trump posted on Twitter, then known as Twitter – and now called X: “Mike Pence did not have the courage to do what should have been done to protect our country and our Constitution by giving the states the “There was a chance to certify a corrected sentence.” of the facts, not the fraudulent or inaccurate facts that they were previously supposed to certify. The USA demands the truth!”

Trump spoke as a candidate, not as president

A key argument that Smith attempts to make in the filing is that when Trump addressed the large crowd he had summoned to Washington DC on January 6, he was speaking not as President of the United States, but in his capacity as a candidate of the Republican Party spoke about the 2020 election.

“He claimed that his 'election victory' was 'stolen,' that he would not 'give up,' and that 'we win the presidency of the United States with only three of the seven states in question,'” the filing says.

The letter claims that Trump used pronouns like “we” to address his electorate directly rather than all Americans, including those who did not vote for him.

“Finally, the defendant repeatedly directed allegations against Biden, his main rival in the election, as a candidate would.”

The “digital breadcrumb”

Prosecutors have outlined in the filing a “digital breadcrumb” of Trump's tweets and social media posts that they say clearly express support for the attacks on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 and since.

His tweets that day, Smith argues in the filing, were “not a message sent to address a matter of public interest and to alleviate unrest; It was the message of an angry candidate who realized he would lose power.”

Prosecutors also alleged that Trump actively monitored the Capitol riots through Fox News and Twitter.

The letter said Trump “sat in the dining room adjacent to the Oval Office, where he checked Twitter and watched television on his phone.”

“In the years following January 6,” the brief continues, “the defendant reiterated his support and loyalty to rioters who broke into the Capitol, calling them patriots and hostages and providing them with financial support.”

Hatch Act and Human Resources Officials

The Hatch Act, a 1939 law, prohibits public officials from expressing support or opposition for a political party or candidate while on the federal job.

The filing alleges that Trump violated that law on Jan. 6 when he and some aides plotted how to overturn the election and in subsequent arguments.

“Federal law confirms that the defendant’s campaign-related conversations with these White House employees were unofficial,” Smith said. “The Hatch Act permits certain White House staff members to engage in political activity while on duty, but prohibits them from using their official authority or influence to interfere with or influence the outcome of an election.”

Trump's answer

In typical fashion, the former president criticized the file published on his social media platform Truth Social on Wednesday.

“Democrats are arming the Justice Department against me because they know I WIN and they are desperate to prop up their failed candidate, Kamala Harris. “The Department of Justice suppressed this latest 'hit' today because JD Vance humiliated Tim Walz in last night's debate,” Trump defiantly posted, referring to the January 1 debate between his running mate, Vance, and Walz, the Democratic Party's vice presidential nominee .October.