Americans are getting their most detailed look yet at the evidence special counsel Jack Smith says he can use to prove that Donald Trump illegally attempted to overturn the 2020 presidential election.
A newly unsealed 165-page court filing lays out prosecutors' case in extraordinary detail, describing conversations with advisers, interactions with state officials, Trump's pressure campaign against Vice President Mike Pence and his conduct as the January 6 attack unfolded at the U.S. Capitol.
The document was unsealed Wednesday by U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan and is dominating the political and legal conversation Thursday.
Smith's central argument is crucial.
Prosecutors contend that much of Trump's effort to remain in power after losing the 2020 election was undertaken not as president performing official duties, but as a presidential candidate trying to win an election.
That distinction could determine whether much of the case survives the Supreme Court's presidential-immunity ruling.
Prosecutors Say Trump Knew He Lost
The filing portrays Trump as repeatedly being told that his claims of widespread election fraud were false.
According to prosecutors, campaign officials, White House advisers, state officials and others told Trump that allegations of widespread fraud either lacked evidence or were simply untrue.
Yet Trump continued publicly insisting that the election had been stolen.
The filing alleges that Trump and his allies pursued multiple avenues to reverse the result after legitimate challenges failed.
Those efforts included pressure on state officials, efforts involving alternate slates of electors and an increasingly intense campaign to persuade Pence to interfere with the certification of electoral votes on January 6.
Trump has pleaded not guilty and denies wrongdoing.
He maintains that the prosecution is politically motivated and argues that his actions following the election were legitimate attempts to challenge results he believed were fraudulent.
The Pressure on Mike Pence
Some of the most striking material concerns Pence.
According to the filing, Trump repeatedly pressured his vice president to use his ceremonial role overseeing the congressional certification of electoral votes to prevent or delay Joe Biden's victory from being certified.
Pence rejected the idea.
Prosecutors describe private conversations in which Pence repeatedly told Trump that he did not have the constitutional authority to do what Trump wanted.
The filing alleges that Trump's pressure became increasingly intense as January 6 approached.
According to prosecutors, when Pence continued refusing, Trump told him that people were going to “hate” him and accused his vice president of being “too honest.”
The filing presents those conversations as evidence that Trump understood Pence's position but continued trying to persuade him to intervene.
January 6
The filing also provides new details about Trump's conduct as violence unfolded at the Capitol.
Thousands of Trump supporters had gathered in Washington after weeks of false claims that the election had been stolen.
After Trump spoke near the White House, a mob eventually breached the Capitol as Congress met to certify Biden's victory.
Pence and members of Congress were moved to secure locations.
According to prosecutors, Trump continued monitoring events and communicating with allies while the Capitol was under attack.
The filing alleges that when Trump was informed that Pence had been moved to safety, Trump responded, “So what?”
Prosecutors also describe Trump's social media post that afternoon criticizing Pence for lacking the “courage” to reject electoral votes.
That message was posted while rioters were inside the Capitol and some members of the crowd were expressing anger toward Pence.
Smith's team argues that Trump's actions during those hours are part of the evidence demonstrating his continued effort to prevent certification of the election.
The Supreme Court Changed the Case
Smith's filing exists because the case against Trump has fundamentally changed.
In July, the Supreme Court ruled that former presidents have broad immunity from criminal prosecution for official presidential acts.
The ruling forced prosecutors to reconsider which portions of their original case could legally proceed.
Smith subsequently obtained a revised indictment.
Now prosecutors are attempting to demonstrate that the remaining allegations involve conduct Trump undertook principally as a candidate for office rather than through his constitutional powers as president.
That is why the distinction between President Trump and candidate Trump runs throughout the new filing.
Smith's team argues that campaigning for reelection is not an official presidential responsibility.
Trump's attorneys strongly disagree with prosecutors' interpretation and maintain that the case should be dismissed.
Trump Attacks the Filing
Trump reacted angrily to the release.
He called the filing another example of election interference and accused Smith and the Justice Department of attempting to damage his presidential campaign just weeks before Election Day.
Trump has consistently maintained that the federal election case is politically motivated.
Smith's office argues that the prosecution is based on evidence of alleged criminal conduct rather than Trump's political candidacy.
The timing nevertheless ensures that the filing will immediately become part of the 2024 presidential campaign.
Election Day is barely a month away.
A Detailed Preview of the Case
The importance of the 165-page filing goes beyond individual revelations.
It provides the clearest picture yet of how Smith intends to prosecute Trump if the case reaches trial.
The document describes witnesses prosecutors could call.
It outlines conversations they could present to a jury.
It describes phone records, messages and other evidence.
And it attempts to establish a narrative in which Trump was repeatedly informed that he had lost the election but nevertheless continued efforts to remain in power.
Those are the government's allegations.
Trump remains presumed innocent unless proven guilty in court.
But until now, much of the evidence behind Smith's election case has remained outside public view.
On October 3, that has changed.
The public can now see, in far greater detail, what Jack Smith says happened between Election Day 2020 and January 6, 2021 — and why federal prosecutors believe Donald Trump's conduct can still be prosecuted despite the Supreme Court's presidential-immunity decision.