By Axios | Created at 2024-10-02 20:18:26 | Updated at 2024-10-02 22:25:53
2 hours ago
Special counsel Jack Smith outlined the "increasingly desperate" efforts by former President Trump and his allies to try to subvert the 2020 presidential election results in a lengthy motion unsealed by a judge on Wednesday.
Why it matters: Trump and his legal team had opposed the motion, arguing it would interfere with the November election results. The filing unveils new details in connection to the former president's federal 2020 election case.
- U.S. District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan unsealed the redacted motion on Wednesday.
Driving the news: Smith in the motion wrote that Trump's "scheme was a private criminal effort" and he emphasized throughout the document that the former president was acting in his capacity as a candidate, not a president.
- This is an apparent attempt by Smith to respond to the bombshell Supreme Court ruling earlier this year that said that presidents have immunity for "official acts."
- "At its core, the defendant's scheme was a private one; he extensively used private actors and his Campaign infrastructure to attempt to overturn the election results and operated in a private capacity as a candidate for office," Smith wrote.
Zoom in: Smith also accused Trump of knowing "his fraud claims were false because he continued to make those claims even after his close advisors—acting not in an official capacity but in a private or campaign-related capacity—told him they were not true."
- "At one point long after the defendant had begun spreading false fraud claims, a White House staffer traveling with [Trump], overheard him tell family members that 'it doesn't matter if you won or lost the election. You still have to fight like hell,'" Smith wrote.
Context: Smith filed the sealed legal brief last week, leaving Chutkan to decide whether or not to publicly release it, or a redacted version of it.
- Prosecutors had said the brief contains previously unseen evidence.
- Trump's legal team argued in their own filing Tuesday that more redactions should be made if the brief was to be made public. They also objected to the release timing as early voting has already begun.
- Prosecutors responded Tuesday, saying they have "no role or interest in partisan politics."
Editor's note: This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
