Special Counsel Jack Smith, who prosecuted President-elect Donald J. Trump on charges of illegally trying to cling to power after losing the 2020 election, said in his final report released early Tuesday that He said the evidence was sufficient to convict Trump. Had his victory in the 2024 election not made it impossible for the prosecution to proceed, he said in court.
“The Department’s view that the Constitution prohibits continued indictment and prosecution of the President is categorical and takes into account the seriousness of the crimes charged, the strength of the government’s case, and the merits of the prosecution. “The Department fully supports this,” Smith wrote.
He continued: “Certainly, but given Mr. Trump’s election and impending return to office, authorities have determined that the admissible evidence is sufficient to obtain and sustain a conviction at trial.” Ta.
The Justice Department submitted the 137-page report, half of Smith’s final report, to Congress just after midnight on Tuesday. The report also includes a report on Trump’s separate federal lawsuit accusing him of mishandling still-classified documents.
The report amounts to an extraordinary rebuke to the president-elect, capping a major legal saga that sees him poised to regain power in the nation’s highest office after being accused of crimes that undermine the very foundations of American democracy. Ta. And while Mr. Smith resigned as special counsel over the weekend, the recount of his case also served as a reminder of the extensive evidence he collected and the detailed account of Mr. Trump’s actions.
Smith said in the report that Trump not only engaged in efforts to overturn the results of a free and fair election, but also consistently engaged in “interim relations with his adversaries” throughout the turbulent weeks between Election Day and January. It pointed out that he had continued to encourage “violence against people deemed to be violent against others.” On June 6, 2021, a mob of Trump supporters stormed the Capitol, injuring more than 140 police officers.
Smith cited evidence from several criminal cases that revealed he believed those charged with participating in the riot were acting on Trump’s behalf, saying the Capitol attack was at Trump’s feet. He directly asserted that it was.
In several lengthy footnotes, Smith detailed the trauma, including “shock” and immobilization, experienced by Capitol Police officers who were attacked during the riot. He quoted a police officer who described efforts to prevent rioters from gaining access to Congressional staff inside the Capitol. A police officer said it “could mean the possibility of death” for them. People are being killed and injured. ”
Another officer recalled that the rioters tried to beat up police “so ferociously” that he thought, “What are they going to do to somebody else here, maybe a staff member or a member of Congress or a member of the media?” . How about, what are they going to do to them? You know, we’re okay with getting hit. And I don’t know if others can endure that violence either. ”
The report’s description of the violence is even more noteworthy given that Trump has repeatedly promised to pardon many of the defendants of January 6th, including perhaps those who assaulted police officers that day. worth it.
The report also revealed the scope of Smith’s investigation, noting that his team interviewed more than 250 people and obtained grand jury testimony from more than 55 witnesses. Smith said the work of the House committee that investigated the Capitol attack and that preceded his investigation was “just a small part of the department’s investigative record.”
The report included broad justifications for pursuing charges based on what Smith called Trump’s “unprecedented criminal conduct to overturn the legitimate results of an election in order to maintain power.” was included.
The book covers investigations ranging from legal battles over executive privilege and presidential immunity to Trump’s “ability and willingness to use his social media influence and following to target witnesses, courts, and department officials.” detailed a number of challenges faced, which required the involvement of law enforcement authorities. They work on time-consuming lawsuits to protect witnesses from intimidation and harassment. ”
Smith said one of the most serious hurdles prosecutors have faced is that their attempts to hold Trump accountable both for his mishandling of classified documents and for his attempts to overturn the 2020 election. I wrote that this was done while Trump was aiming for the White House again.
“Mr. Trump’s announcement of his presidential candidacy, with two ongoing federal criminal investigations, posed an unprecedented challenge for the Justice Department and the courts,” Smith wrote. “Given the timing and circumstances of the special prosecutor’s appointment and the office’s operations, it was inevitable that the normal procedures of the criminal law and judicial system would occur in parallel with the campaign.”
The report includes an indictment filed in August 2023 in U.S. District Court in Washington, as well as a lengthy memorandum of evidence filed by Smith in October (part of Aftermath) that has not yet been made public. It contained little information about his actions. From the Supreme Court’s ruling that Trump enjoyed presumed immunity for his official acts as president.
Mr. Smith’s report reveals new details about several unindicted co-conspirators named in the indictment, including former Justice Department official Jeffrey Clark and Mr. Trump’s personal lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani. There was some speculation that they might be able to do so, but the report had little new to say about them.
Without naming specific individuals, Smith said his team had “made a preliminary determination that admissible evidence warrants charges against certain co-conspirators” and that any such new case would be I briefly wrote that I had begun evaluating whether this should be done jointly with Mr. Smith. Trump’s or brought separately.
“This report is an investigation into the individuals who were not indicted, as authorities have not reached a final conclusion or sought charges against anyone other than Mr. Trump, the mastermind and beneficiary of the criminal conspiracy.” “We did not provide further details on the preliminary assessment.” Said. “This report should not be read to allege that any person other than Mr. Trump committed a crime, nor should it be read to exonerate any person.”
The release of the entire report comes less than a day after a Florida judge handling Mr. Trump’s other federal lawsuit, one involving classified documents, ruled that the report could be made public. Ta.
But Judge Eileen M. Cannon, a Trump appointee, also blocked the Justice Department from immediately releasing the second volume of Smith’s report on the documents case, even to Congress. Judge Cannon has scheduled a hearing Friday in his home court in Fort Pierce, Fla., to discuss how to handle that particular portion.
Trump’s lawyers, who were shown a draft of Smith’s report before its release, spent more than a week touting it as a “political damage attempt aimed solely at disrupting the presidential transition.” I have criticized it for being too much. Lawyers fought until the last moment to get the report released, but ultimately were unable to prevent mass disclosures about the election case.
In a social media post just before 2 a.m. Tuesday, Mr. Trump expressed anger at the release of the report, calling Mr. Smith “crazy” and claiming the prosecution was political.
“Jack is a stupid prosecutor who couldn’t get me to trial before the election that I won by a landslide,” Trump said. “Voters have spoken!!!”
The election complaint filed by Mr. Smith against Mr. Trump accuses him of engaging in three intersecting conspiracies to overturn his loss to President Biden. Mr. Smith also filed a separate indictment in Florida alleging that Mr. Trump illegally retained classified documents after he left office and conspired with two co-defendants to obstruct repeated efforts by the government to retrieve classified documents. Accused.
After Trump won the 2024 election, Smith dropped the case, citing Justice Department policy barring prosecution of sitting presidents. Under another department provision, he was required to document the decisions he made in both cases and submit a final report on them (one for each charge) to Attorney General Merrick B. Garland. .
The Justice Department announced last week that it would hold off on publishing a booklet on the classified documents case until Garland completes all legal proceedings related to two of Trump’s co-defendants.
Co-defendants Walt Nauta and Carlos de Oliveira fought the release last week by obtaining an initial restraining order from Judge Cannon, who dismissed the classified documents lawsuit last summer.
