Countdown to Trump’s Return: Legal Challenges Ahead
As Donald Trump prepares for a potential return to the presidency, a stark warning has been issued by Special Counsel Jack Smith: there exists significant evidence that could lead to Trump’s imprisonment.
On Tuesday, the Justice Department released its comprehensive report outlining allegations that Trump unlawfully sought to overturn the 2020 election results. The report suggests that prosecutors have gathered enough evidence to secure a conviction had the case not been stalled by Trump’s electoral victory. “Had it not been for Mr. Trump’s election and his impending return to the presidency, the office determined that the available evidence would have been adequate to achieve and uphold a conviction at trial,” the report claims.
This document serves as a significant indictment of a figure on the verge of reclaiming presidential power. While many of the findings were previously known—Trump’s attempts to maintain power after the 2020 election have been widely reported, featured in documentaries, and examined during congressional hearings—this report offers new insights into how Trump challenged the foundations of American democracy and the government he aims to lead once again.
Smith’s team interviewed over 250 individuals and secured grand jury testimony from more than 55 witnesses, noting that the findings from the House committee investigating the Capitol attack represent only a fraction of their investigative records. In the detailed 137-page report, Smith outlines Trump’s attempts to obstruct a peaceful transfer of power, detailing actions that ranged from pressuring state and federal officials to overturn election results to inciting a violent mob to storm the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021. Smith accuses Trump of trying to disrupt the certification of Biden’s election “through fraud and deceit,” including urging “violence against perceived adversaries” leading up to the insurrection.
“As described in the initial and subsequent indictments, when it became clear that Mr. Trump had lost the election and legitimate means of contesting the results had failed, he resorted to a series of criminal actions to hold onto power,” the report states.
The investigation faced unique challenges, stemming from the complexities of probing a former president and Trump’s considerable influence. Smith addressed legal issues surrounding executive privilege, the Supreme Court’s ruling regarding presidential immunity, and Trump’s tactics of intimidation. “Mr. Trump utilized his substantial social media presence to make extrajudicial comments—sometimes threatening—about the case, forcing the Office to seek litigation to protect the integrity of the proceedings and prevent witness intimidation,” he explained.
Additionally, the case was marred by public perceptions of political bias and unfolded during an election season. “Mr. Trump’s announcement of his presidential candidacy while two federal criminal investigations were active created an unprecedented challenge for the Department of Justice and the judiciary,” Smith noted.
Prosecutors also considered charging Trump under the Insurrection Act—an old law against rebellion—but ultimately determined there wasn’t enough evidence to prove Trump intended to incite widespread violence on January 6.
Many participants in the violent events may avoid legal consequences. Trump has indicated that one of his first actions upon taking office on January 20 will be to pardon most, if not all, individuals charged in relation to the Capitol attack. “It’s going to start in the first hour,” he recently told TIME. “Maybe in the first nine minutes.” In contrast, Vice President-elect J.D. Vance remarked on Fox News that those who “committed violence” on January 6 “obviously” should not receive pardons.
Trump’s legal team received a draft of the report over a week ago and has opposed its release, labeling it a smear campaign aimed at “disrupting the presidential transition.” They are also attempting to block the publication of a separate report by Smith regarding Trump’s handling of classified documents. On Monday, Judge Aileen Cannon, a Trump appointee, issued a temporary halt on its release and scheduled a hearing for Friday to discuss the issue.
Nevertheless, Trump seems unlikely to face any real consequences. Smith indicated that both cases would be dismissed after Trump secured the 2024 election, citing a Justice Department policy that prohibits prosecuting sitting presidents. Due to separate agency regulations, he was obliged to submit a final report—one for each prosecution—to Attorney General Merrick Garland, who has committed to publishing both documents.
However, with Trump’s inauguration approaching, the report may have limited practical impact beyond enriching the historical record. For Trump, who has a remarkable knack for avoiding accountability, even this situation can be viewed as a victory. “Jack is a clueless prosecutor who failed to bring his case to trial before the Election, which I won by a landslide,” Trump declared on his social media platform. “THE VOTERS HAVE SPOKEN!!!”
