Special counsel outlines bid to show Trump motive and knowledge behind bid to stay in power

Special Counsel Jack Smith’s team outlined on Tuesday the evidence it has collected against former President Trump, walking through information they say will showcase his motive and knowledge of a plan to block the transfer of power.

The breakdown comes in a request to introduce evidence of events both before and after the conspiracy outlined in the indictment, but that “establish his motive, intent, preparation, knowledge,” and plans related to his efforts to stay in power.

The filing shows prosecutors plan to showcase an array of Trump comments dating as far back as 2012, when he sought to cast into doubt the legitimacy of elections whose results he did not favor.

That includes the multiple instances when Trump refused to commit to accept the results of either the 2016 or 2020 election.

Prosecutors also plan to show evidence gathered about other Trump associates, including the encouraging of riots at a Detroit vote counting center and the targeting of a Republican National Committee attorney who countered Trump’s claims of fraud.

“The Campaign Employee encouraged rioting and other methods of obstruction when he learned that the vote count was trending in favor of the defendant’s opponent,” the filing says of a campaign employee who sought to mobilize riots at the TCF Center after President Biden took the lead in vote counts.

“Thereafter, Trump made repeated false claims regarding election activities at the TCF Center, when in truth his agent was seeking to cause a riot to disrupt the count.”

But much of the filing indicates prosecutors plan to bring in an array of Trump comments they argue show a longstanding refusal to accept election results and instead undermine the process, something they say all show “his motive, intent, and plan to obstruct the certification of the 2020 election results and illegitimately retain power.”

The filing points to false claims Trump made in 2012 of voting machines switching votes, as well as 2016 comments there was widespread voter fraud in the election in which he was running.

“The defendant’s false claims about the 2012 and 2016 elections are admissible because they demonstrate the defendant’s common plan of falsely blaming fraud for election results he does not like,” prosecutors wrote.

Prosecutors argue his comments about plans to “keep you in suspense” about whether he would accept the 2016 results amount to the same.

“The Government will offer proof of this refusal as intrinsic evidence of the defendant’s criminal conspiracies because it shows his plan to remain in power at any cost—even in the face of potential violence,” prosecutors wrote.

DEVELOPING