Five takeaways from Smith’s report on Trump’s 2020 election case

Donald Trump’s alleged attempts to overturn his 2020 election loss are laid out in a final report by the special counsel who spent two years investigating him.

Much of what is contained in its 140 pages was already known, thanks to a congressional investigation in 2022 and previous court filings by the report’s author, Jack Smith.

But it sheds new light on some of the evidence uncovered by Smith’s team and outlines its own thinking on some of the finer legal points.

Trump, who returns to the White House next week, was quick to respond to the report’s release, maintaining his innocence and calling Smith “deranged.”

Here are five takeaways from the report.

The report addresses the riot at the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, when Trump supporters invaded the building to try to thwart the certification of Biden’s victory, after hearing a speech at Trump’s Washington DC Ellipse , the defeated candidate.

“Mr. Trump’s words inspired his followers to commit acts of physical violence,” the report said.

It goes on to note: “Although Mr. Trump at one point also told his supporters to ‘peacefully and patriotically make (their) voices heard,’ he used the word ‘fight’ more than ten times in the speech.”

Trump has promised that upon his return to office he will pardon many of those convicted of crimes related to the riot, which he has tried to reframe as a “day of love.”

His defenders have rejected the idea that he deliberately incited the crowd, pointing to the “peaceful” quote highlighted by Smith above.

The report addresses the basis on which Trump was prosecuted, making clear that Smith’s team considered bringing a charge of “incitement of insurrection” against the then-president.

The document says Trump’s speech at the Ellipse on January 6, 2021 could meet the Supreme Court’s definition of incitement, especially when viewed alongside his “long and misleading narrative of election fraud.”

The report suggests that the day’s violence was “foreseeable” for Trump, for example, and that he attempted to “take advantage” of the events to delay Biden’s certification.

But Trump was ultimately not charged with incitement because Smith’s team found “no direct evidence” of his intent to cause “the full scope of violence” during the Capitol riot, making conviction uncertain.

The document further notes that there were “other powerful positions available.”

Several men charged and convicted for their role in the Capitol attack pointed to Trump’s influence as a motivating factor, the report says.

It cites some of the rioters, including Alex Harkrider, who called for release from prison before his trial, arguing that “like thousands of others” he was simply “responding to pleas” from Trump.

Another man, David Mehaffi, when seeking mitigation in sentencing, cited Trump’s speech and added: “I trusted the president and that was a big mistake.”

What Smith fails to acknowledge in his report is that it was in the interests of these men to deflect responsibility from themselves.

In repeated conversations, day after day, Trump asked his vice president to use his ministerial position as president of the Senate to change the outcome of the election by not certifying the results, Smith’s report states.

Pence refused, and Trump once told him that “hundreds of thousands” of people would “hate his guts” if he didn’t concede.

The pressure campaign on his deputy continued in public. In a speech, Trump said he hoped Pence would do it, but if he didn’t, “I won’t like him as much.”

Just before leaving the White House to give his speech on the Ellipse before the attack on the Capitol, Trump called Pence one last time, Smith says. When the vice president told him on the call that he did not have the authority to carry out Trump’s wishes, Trump told staff to insert back into his speech some language he had previously drafted directed at Pence.

Moments after the speech, Trump supporters roamed the halls of the Capitol chanting “hang Mike Pence” and searching for him in offices.

Smith describes the experiences of on-duty law enforcement when the mob stormed the Capitol building, during which at least 140 officers were assaulted.

It notes that 123 defendants were subsequently charged with using a deadly or dangerous weapon or causing serious bodily injury to law enforcement.

“This violence took a lasting toll,” the report says, noting that 223 officers suffered “‘invisible wounds,’ including depression and other forms of psychological trauma.”

A footnote offers more insight into the officers’ feelings of “survivor’s guilt,” “shock,” and “inability to move on from that day.”