Special counsel Jack Smith claims Trump can be found guilty in Jan 6 case of false election claims even if he truly believed it was stolen

This recent 79-page filing goes against an argument by Trump's legal defense that he was not deceptive, as it is his sincere belief that "the election was stolen."

A new filing put forth on Monday by special counsel Jack Smith in former President Donald Trump's January 6 case alleged he used "deceit, trickery, or dishonest means" when arguing that he had won the 2020 presidential election.

The initial indictment against Trump says that he "made knowingly false claims that there had been outcome-determinative fraud in the 2020 presidential election" as part of an effort to overturn the results, reports the Daily Mail.

This recent 79-page filing goes against an argument by Trump's legal defense that he was not at all deceptive, as it is his sincere belief that "the election was stolen."

"Just as the president of a company may be guilty of fraud for using knowingly false statements of facts to defraud investors, even if he subjectively believes that his company will eventually succeed ... the defendant may be guilty of using deceit to obstruct the government function by which the results of the presidential election are collected, counted, and certified, even if he provides evidence that he subjectively believed that the election was 'rigged,'” according to the filing.

Trump is faced a myriad of legal battles amid his 2024 presidential campaign. On Monday, the former president referred to a separate case of his, the civil fraud trial brought forth by New York Attorney General Letitia James, as "ridiculous" and said it amounts to "election interference."

"These are political operatives that I’m going to be dealing with right now," he said, later remarking that "it’s a very sad situation for our country."

This comes after a 3-judge panel on the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia allowed for a temporary stay last week on a gag order that was imposed on Trump by Judge Tanya Chutkan in the January 6 conspiracy case.

"No court in American history has imposed a gag order to silence any political candidate—until now. The district court’s unconstitutional gag order prevents President Trump—the leading candidate for President of the United States—from engaging in core political speech, which is entitled to the highest level of protection under the First Amendment," read the emergency motion that had been filed by Trump's attorneys.
Sign in to comment


Powered by StructureCMS™ Comments

Join and support independent free thinkers!

We’re independent and can’t be cancelled. The establishment media is increasingly dedicated to divisive cancel culture, corporate wokeism, and political correctness, all while covering up corruption from the corridors of power. The need for fact-based journalism and thoughtful analysis has never been greater. When you support The Post Millennial, you support freedom of the press at a time when it's under direct attack. Join the ranks of independent, free thinkers by supporting us today for as little as $1.

Support The Post Millennial

Remind me next month

To find out what personal data we collect and how we use it, please visit our Privacy Policy

By signing up you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy
© 2024 The Post Millennial, Privacy Policy | Do Not Sell My Personal Information