Unsealed Filing Challenges Trump's Immunity in Jan. 6 Case

Improve the News Foundation -
0:00
/1861

Facts

  • US Special Counsel Jack Smith on Wednesday in a 165-page filing argued that former Pres. Donald Trump's alleged actions to overturn the 2020 election are not protected by presidential immunity.[1]
  • The filing, which was unsealed by US District Judge Tanya Chutkan with redactions, details how Trump allegedly 'resorted to crimes' to deny his loss to Joe Biden in the 2020 election. It also describes how then-Vice President Mike Pence attempted to dissuade Trump's actions.[2]
  • Smith in August adjusted his case to comply with the US Supreme Court's ruling that presidents are immune from prosecution for actions taken in their official capacity. A federal grand jury then issued a new indictment. This filing argues Trump and Pence were 'fundamentally' acting as private candidates during their discussions.[3]
  • Trump allegedly told Pence that 'hundreds of thousands' of people would 'hate your guts' and called him 'too honest' in his role on Jan. 6, 2021. When told Pence was in danger during the riots at the US Capitol, Trump allegedly looked at an aide and said, 'So what?'[1][4]
  • Prosecutors also describe what they call a 'digital breadcrumb' of Trump's social media activity, which they say shows his continued support of those who attacked the Capitol. Trump's posts from Jan. 6, they say, show 'an angry candidate' who was watching the events unfold on television.[5]
  • Trump called the release of the filing 'election interference,' arguing that the Department of Justice (DOJ) should not take actions that could affect an election within 60 days of voting.[6]

Sources: [1]CNN, [2]BBC News, [3]NBC, [4]FOX News, [5]Al Jazeera and [6]Daily Mail.

Narratives

  • Democratic narrative, as provided by MSNBC and Slate. This filing exposes the extent of Trump's pressure campaign on Pence and demonstrates that his conduct was outside the scope of presidential duties. It's frustrating that SCOTUS made sure this case wouldn't be aired for the American people before the 2024 election, but at least there's hope Trump will someday be held accountable.
  • Republican narrative, as provided by Raw Story and Federalist. One need only look at Smith's contradictions between his previous filing and the current one to see how this is just lawfare and election interference with no substance. But it's no surprise because this and other cases against Trump have always been politically motivated and never based on any sort of rule of law.

Predictions