New evidence about former President Donald Trump’s efforts to change the results of the 2020 election was made public. A court filing, unsealed by U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, reveals many new details about what Trump and his team did after the election, leading up to the riot at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021. Special counsel Jack Smith is responsible for bringing this case against Trump, accusing him of criminal behavior in an attempt to stay in power. This filing provides key evidence that will be used in court.
What Happened?
The 2020 election ended with Joe Biden winning, but Donald Trump and his team refused to accept the results. The documents show that Trump and his advisors planned different ways to challenge the outcome, even though they knew they were wrong. Trump and his allies spread false claims about voter fraud, saying that the election had been stolen from him, even after his advisors told him there was no evidence to support these claims.
Trump’s campaign tried to convince election officials in several states to ignore the real results. They targeted states like Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin—states that Trump had lost. One key part of this effort involved telling election officials to create fake sets of electors, which are the people who officially cast each state’s votes for president. Trump hoped to use these fake electors to change the results in his favor.
Encouraging Riots
One of the most concerning details in the filing is that Trump’s team may have encouraged violence. For example, on November 4, 2020, a Trump campaign official reacted to a batch of votes favoring Biden in Detroit by saying, “Make them riot.” This comment came two months before the actual riot on January 6, 2021, when Trump’s supporters stormed the Capitol. It seems that some people in Trump’s circle did not care about whether their claims were true, but were focused on causing enough chaos to disrupt the election results.
Trump’s Reaction During the Capitol Riot
On January 6, 2021, Trump’s supporters attacked the Capitol as Congress was trying to certify Joe Biden’s victory. The filing provides new information about Trump’s behavior that day. According to the evidence, Trump was sitting in the White House dining room, watching Fox News, and using Twitter while the riot unfolded. His advisors told him that things were getting dangerous, and that rioters had broken into the Capitol. Trump knew that Vice President Mike Pence was in danger, but instead of taking action to calm the situation, he tweeted at 2:24 p.m., criticizing Pence for not helping to block the certification of the election. Rioters had even been chanting for Pence to be hanged.
Trump’s response to the situation was shocking. When an aide told him that Pence had been moved to a secure location because his life was at risk, Trump reportedly responded, “So what?” This shows that Trump was aware of the violence but did not care about the safety of his own vice president. Trump did not call for the rioters to go home until more than two hours later, at 4:17 p.m.
False Claims of Fraud
Throughout this time, Trump continued to insist that the election had been stolen through widespread fraud. However, the filing shows that many of Trump’s closest advisors told him that his claims were false. For instance, the filing includes information about meetings where Trump’s advisors, including Vice President Mike Pence, explained that there was no evidence of the large-scale fraud Trump was talking about.
Despite knowing the truth, Trump and his team kept making false claims to the public. At one point, Trump’s National Committee Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel told Trump that his claims of fraud were wrong. Still, Trump kept pushing these baseless claims, including ideas that dead people, non-citizens, and others who were ineligible had voted.
The filing also highlights that Trump’s legal team couldn’t prove these fraud claims in court, and even his advisors told him privately that the lawsuits had no chance of winning. Trump was informed by his campaign team that they had hired outside experts to investigate fraud allegations, but those experts found no evidence to support his claims. Even so, Trump continued to spread lies about the election to the public.
Attempts to Overturn Results in Key States
Trump’s team tried various strategies to overturn the results in states that he lost. For example, Trump called officials in Arizona, including Governor Doug Ducey, asking for evidence of fraud, which Ducey said didn’t exist. Even after Trump was told there was no evidence, he and his lawyers continued to claim that non-citizens had illegally voted in Arizona. Trump’s campaign also made several phone calls to other state officials, trying to pressure them to overturn the results based on false claims.
In Georgia, Trump’s team pressured election officials to “find” votes that didn’t exist. Trump and his allies made phone calls to officials, asking them to change the results in his favor. Trump even contacted the Speaker of the Arizona House of Representatives, trying to get him to ignore the real results and appoint a fake set of electors.
Legal Consequences and Immunity
One of the major challenges in this case is whether or not Trump can be held legally responsible for his actions. The Supreme Court has ruled that presidents have some legal immunity for actions they take while in office, which means they usually can’t be prosecuted for official duties. However, Jack Smith, the special counsel, argues that Trump’s actions to overturn the election were not part of his official duties as president, but instead were efforts to remain in power as a candidate for re-election.
The court will now have to decide whether Trump’s behavior falls under the protection of presidential immunity, or if he can be held responsible for his actions. If the court decides that his actions were unofficial and based on his role as a candidate, Trump may face trial.
What Happens Next?
The case is far from over. Trump’s lawyers are expected to argue that much of his behavior should be protected by presidential immunity, while Jack Smith and his team will argue that Trump’s actions were unlawful and designed to keep him in power after he lost the election. The next few months will be critical as the court considers this evidence and decides how to move forward.
This case is especially important because Trump is once again running for president in 2024. Depending on how this trial goes, it could have a major impact on his campaign. For now, we’ll have to wait and see what the court decides.
This article is based on the following articles:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/10/02/jack-smith-trump-2020-election-filing-takeaways
Background Information
1. The U.S. Presidential Election Process
The President of the United States is elected every four years through a system called the Electoral College. Each state is assigned a certain number of electoral votes based on its population. When citizens vote for president, they are actually voting for electors who pledge to support their chosen candidate. A candidate needs at least 270 electoral votes to win the election.
Once the votes are counted in each state, those results are certified, and the electors formally cast their votes. Congress then meets to certify the final result and officially confirm the president-elect. This process ensures that every state’s results are counted and respected in the final decision.
2. The 2020 Presidential Election
The 2020 election was held on November 3, 2020, between the sitting president, Donald Trump, and former Vice President Joe Biden. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, there was a significant increase in mail-in voting, which delayed the counting of votes in some states. As a result, it took several days to determine the winner. Ultimately, Joe Biden won both the popular vote and enough electoral votes to secure the presidency.
After the election, Trump refused to concede (admit defeat), claiming that the election had been “stolen” from him through widespread voter fraud. These claims led to multiple legal challenges and other actions by Trump and his allies to try to change the outcome.
3. Voter Fraud and Election Lawsuits
Voter fraud refers to illegal interference with the election process. In the U.S., elections are carefully monitored to prevent fraud, but accusations sometimes arise. After the 2020 election, Trump and his team filed numerous lawsuits in different states, claiming that fraud had occurred. They argued that things like mail-in ballots and voting machines were used to rig the election against Trump.
However, courts across the country, including the Supreme Court, rejected these claims because there was no evidence of widespread fraud. Most of the lawsuits were dismissed, and election officials, both Democrat and Republican, affirmed that the election results were fair and accurate.
4. The January 6, 2021, Capitol Riot
On January 6, 2021, Congress met to formally certify the Electoral College results, which would confirm Joe Biden’s win. On the same day, a large group of Trump supporters gathered in Washington, D.C., for a rally where Trump spoke and continued to claim the election had been stolen. After the rally, many of these supporters marched to the U.S. Capitol building, where Congress was meeting.
Some of the protesters broke into the Capitol, causing a violent disruption. They damaged property, fought with police, and delayed the certification process. This event, now called the “Capitol Riot” or “January 6 Insurrection,” is one of the key events discussed in the article. Law enforcement eventually cleared the building, and Congress reconvened later that evening to certify the results.
5. Donald Trump’s Role as a Candidate vs. President
In the case discussed in the article, an important legal question is whether Trump was acting in his role as president or as a candidate when he tried to overturn the election results. As president, Trump had certain powers and responsibilities, but he was also a candidate running for re-election. The Supreme Court has ruled that presidents are generally immune from criminal prosecution for actions taken as part of their official duties. However, the court will need to decide if Trump’s actions to overturn the election were part of his role as president or just as a candidate trying to stay in power.
6. Presidential Immunity
Presidential immunity means that the president cannot be sued or prosecuted for actions taken while performing official duties. This legal protection exists to prevent lawsuits from interfering with the president’s ability to govern. However, it does not cover actions taken outside of the president’s official duties, such as personal or campaign-related activities.
The court in this case will need to determine whether Trump’s actions to overturn the 2020 election are protected by presidential immunity or if he can be held accountable for what he did after losing the election.
7. Electoral College and Fake Electors
The Electoral College is a group of representatives, known as electors, who formally cast votes for the president based on the results of the popular vote in their state. After the election, each state certifies its election results and sends a list of electors to Congress, where the results are finalized.
In the 2020 election case, Trump’s team allegedly tried to create “fake electors” in states he lost. These were groups of people who falsely claimed to be the official electors from their states and tried to submit fake electoral votes for Trump instead of Biden. This plan was part of the effort to overturn the election results, and it is a major issue in the court case.
8. The Role of Vice President Mike Pence
In his role as vice president, Mike Pence had the ceremonial duty of overseeing the certification of the Electoral College results on January 6, 2021. Some people, including Trump, believed that Pence had the power to stop the certification or send the results back to the states for review. However, Pence repeatedly said that he did not have the authority to change the outcome of the election and that his job was only to ensure the process was followed.
Trump publicly pressured Pence to intervene, and many of the rioters on January 6 were angry with Pence for not helping Trump overturn the results. This is why the rioters chanted for Pence to be hanged during the Capitol attack.
9. Jack Smith and Special Counsel Investigations
Jack Smith is the special counsel appointed to investigate Donald Trump’s actions related to the 2020 election. A special counsel is a lawyer appointed by the government to investigate cases where there is a potential conflict of interest or high-level involvement. Smith’s job is to look at all the evidence and decide whether Trump broke any laws during his efforts to overturn the election.
Smith’s investigation has led to criminal charges against Trump for conspiracy (working with others to commit a crime) and trying to stop the official government process of counting and certifying the votes. The case is now in court, where both sides will present their evidence.
10. What is Conspiracy?
A conspiracy is an agreement between two or more people to commit a crime. In this case, Trump and several of his allies are accused of conspiring to interfere with the election results by spreading false information, pressuring officials to change the outcome, and trying to use fake electors to swing the results in Trump’s favor. The court will need to determine if Trump and his team worked together in a criminal way to change the election.
11. The Role of the Supreme Court
The U.S. Supreme Court is the highest court in the country, and it has the power to interpret the Constitution and make decisions that affect the entire nation. In Trump’s case, the Supreme Court has already ruled that presidents have some legal immunity, but the court may be asked to decide how much protection Trump has for his actions during the election aftermath. If the case goes back to the Supreme Court, their ruling could have a major impact on Trump’s trial.
Debate/Essay Questions
- Do the legal protections given to presidents, such as presidential immunity, need to be changed to prevent future abuses of power?
- What are the dangers of spreading false claims about election fraud, and how should these actions be addressed in a democratic society?
Please subscribe to Insight Fortnight, our biweekly newsletter!