'Uphill battle': Why one of Trump's defenses for J6 could backfire

Now that former President Donald Trump has been indicted in the January 6 investigation, speculation turns to how the former president's defense team will try to exonerate him at trial against special counsel Jack Smith's accusations that he knowingly instructed people to lie about election integrity and to try to overturn results.

A Wall Street Journal report highlights one defense they might use — but highlights some serious problems with it.

“Trump may argue that when he made claims about the election, and otherwise sought to overturn the results, that he was acting in good faith,” explained Temidayo Aganga-Williams, a lawyer who helped advise the House January 6 Committee, in conversation with WSJ.

However, the report noted, this would be an "uphill battle." “The indictment demonstrates that the special counsel has evidence that individuals from the White House to the Trump re-election campaign to the Department of Justice and state officials all told President Trump that his efforts to overturn the election were misguided and illegal," Aganga-Williams said.

Trump's legal team also seems to be making a First Amendment defense, arguing that Trump's conspiracy to overturn election results was protected political speech.

As legal experts like Elie Honig have said, a First Amendment defense is unlikely to work either, because the law does not protect speech used to further a fraud scheme, which is what Smith alleges.

There are signs that even before the trial begins, Trump's legal team will try other maneuvers to give themselves an edge, with one attorney even floating the idea of moving the trial to West Virginia — but they face long odds of winning such a motion, experts said.