Special Counsel Jack Smith said his team “defended the rule of law” while investigating President-elect Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election results, writing in a long-awaited report released Tuesday that he fully stands behind his decision. To bring criminal charges that he believes would have led to a conviction had voters not returned Trump to the White House.
“The primary goal of all of Mr. Trump’s criminal efforts was deception — intentionally false claims of election fraud — and the evidence shows that Mr. Trump used these lies as a weapon to defeat the federal government’s essential function of the democratic process in the United States,” the report states.
The report, released just days before Trump returns to office on January 20, focuses new attention on his frantic but failed efforts to cling to power in 2020. With prosecution barred thanks to Trump’s election victory, the document is expected to be made public. The Department of Justice’s definitive chronicle of a dark chapter in American history that threatened to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power, a bedrock of democracy for centuries, and complements the indictments and reports already released.
Trump responded early Tuesday with a post on his Truth Social platform, claiming he is “completely innocent” and calling Smith “a feckless prosecutor who couldn’t get his case tried before the election.” He added: “The voters have spoken!!!”
Trump was indicted in August 2023 on charges of working to overturn the election, but the case was delayed by appeals and ultimately narrowed significantly by the conservative-majority Supreme Court, which ruled for the first time that former presidents enjoy blanket immunity from criminal prosecution because of their involvement in… War crimes. Official acts.
Get daily national news
Get the day’s top political, economic and current affairs news, headlines, delivered to your inbox once a day.
Although Smith sought to have the indictment salvaged, the team rejected it entirely in November because of a long-standing Justice Department policy that sitting presidents cannot face federal prosecution.
“The Department’s view that the Constitution prohibits the continued impeachment and trial of the President is categorical and does not depend on the seriousness of the crimes charged, the strength of the government’s evidence, or the merits of the trial, which the Office fully stands behind.” “Indeed, but for Mr. Trump’s election and imminent return to the presidency, the office judged that the admissible evidence was sufficient to obtain and sustain a conviction at trial,” the report states.
The Justice Department referred the report to Congress early Tuesday after a judge rejected defense efforts to block its publication. A separate volume of the report focuses on Trump’s hoarding of secret documents at Mar-a-Lago, actions that formed the basis of a separate indictment against Trump and will remain secret for now.
Although most of the details of Trump’s efforts to undo the election are already well-established, the document includes for the first time a detailed assessment from Smith of his investigation, as well as Smith’s defense against criticism by Trump and his allies that the investigation was politicized or worked in collaboration with the White House — an assessment he described as It was “laughable.”
“Although we were unable to bring the cases we charged to trial, I believe the fact that our team defended the rule of law is important,” Smith wrote in a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland attached to the report. “I think the example our team has set for others to fight for justice without considering the personal costs is important.”
The special counsel also outlined the challenges he faced in his investigation, including Trump’s assertion of executive privilege to try to block witnesses from providing evidence, forcing prosecutors to fight closed court battles before bringing charges in the case.
Another “significant challenge” was Trump’s “ability and willingness to use his influence and social media following to target witnesses, courts, and prosecutors,” which led prosecutors to seek a gag order to protect potential witnesses from harassment, Smith wrote.
“Mr. Trump’s resort to intimidation and harassment during the investigation was not new, as evidenced by his actions during the conspiracies he is accused of,” Smith wrote.
“A key element of Mr. Trump’s conduct that underlies the accusations in the election case was his pattern of using social media — Twitter at the time — to publicly attack and seek to influence state and federal officials, judges and election workers who refused to support the allegations,” he added. Those who lied that the election was stolen or who resisted were complicit in Mr. Trump’s scheme.”
Smith also explained for the first time the thinking process behind his team’s prosecutorial decisions, writing that his office decided not to charge Trump with incitement in part because of free speech concerns, or with insurrection because he was the sitting president at the time and there was doubt whether he would go forward with prosecution for the crime — which he did not. There is no record of her being tried before.
Associated Press writer Zeke Miller contributed reporting.
& Edition 2025 The Canadian Press
