A recent filing by Jack Smith identifies Donald Trump as responsible for directing the riot on January 6th: “the indictment’s clear
allegations that the defendant is responsible for the events at the Capitol on January 6.” Trump is trying to distance himself from the actions of the rioters, during his moron’s rebellion. The special prosecutor’s office says no way.
Trump incited violence from the podium. When his sounder of traitorous MAGAs broke into the Capitol, his Vice-President in danger and his staff pleading with him to calm the riot, Trump stoked the flames. While Trump failed to join his mob, he clearly intended to and was reported quite upset when the Secret Service disallowed him. To this day he praises the virtues of his mob.
Someone on the inside is clearly testifying. None of this is surprising. It was clear on January 6th that this was an attempt to overthrow the Government to keep Trump in power at Trump’s urging. What is surprising is that conservatives still want to vote for the guy. How is it possible he is the “frontrunner” of anything but a reality show about which Trump family member will serve time first?
From the filing:
On January 6, 2021, “[l]ives were lost; blood was shed; portions of the Capitol building
were badly damaged; and the lives of members of the House and Senate, as well as aides, staffers,
and others who were working in the building, were endangered.” Trump v. Thompson, 20 F.4th
10, 35-36 (D.C. Cir. 2021), cert. denied, 142 S. Ct. 1350 (2022). Yet publicly, the defendant has
promoted and extolled the events of that day. While the violent attack was ongoing, the defendant
told rioters that they were “very special” and that “we love you.” In the years since, he has
championed rioters as “great patriots” and proclaimed January 6 “a beautiful day.” In this case,
though, the defendant seeks to distance himself, moving to strike allegations in the indictment
related to “the actions at the Capitol on January 6, 2021.” ECF No. 115 at 1. The Court should
recognize the defendant’s motion for what it is: a meritless effort to evade the indictment’s clear
allegations that the defendant is responsible for the events at the Capitol on January 6. Indeed,
that day was the culmination of the defendant’s criminal conspiracies to overturn the legitimate
results of the presidential election, when the defendant directed a large and angry crowd—one that
he had summoned to Washington, D.C., and fueled with knowingly false claims of election
fraud—to the Capitol to obstruct the congressional certification proceeding. When his supporters
did so, including through violence, the defendant did not try to stop them; instead, he encouraged
them and attempted to leverage their actions by further obstructing the certification. Contrary to
the defendant’s claims, then, the indictment’s allegations related to the actions at the Capitol are
relevant and probative evidence of the defendant’s conduct and intent, and they are neither
prejudicial nor inflammatory. His motion to strike them from the indictment must be denied.