Judge unseals new evidence about Trump’s actions around Jan. 6 Capitol Hill attack : NPR

In a newly unsealed court filing, special counsel Jack Smith provided the most detailed picture yet of his criminal case against Donald Trump for allegedly trying to overturn the 2020 election and why the former president isn’t immune from prosecution.

U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, who is presiding over the case, released the filing, with minor redactions, on Wednesday.

The special counsel uses the 165-page document to make his case that Trump’s actions around the election were made in a private capacity, and not his official role a president.

This comes after the Supreme Court ruled this summer that presidents enjoy broad immunity for official acts while in office, but not for unofficial acts as a candidate or private citizen.

“When the defendant lost the 2020 presidential election, he resorted to crimes to try to stay in office,” the special counsel’s team writes. “With private co-conspirators, the defendant launched a series of increasingly desperate plans to overturn the legitimate election results in seven states that he had lost.”

A D.C. grand jury indictment accused Trump of actions that culminated in the violent siege at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. If he regains the White House, Trump is expected to direct new Justice Department leaders to drop the landmark case.

“At its core, the defendant’s scheme was a private criminal effort,” the special counsel writes. “In his capacity as a candidate, the defendant used deceit to target every stage of the electoral process.”

The broad strokes of the special counsel’s allegations against Trump have long been known. The filing, though, adds some new details, including Trump’s conversations with his vice president, Mike Pence.

Lawyers for Trump and for Special Counsel Jack Smith had clashed over whether the brief should be released, given its potential impact on the 2024 election where Trump is the Republican nominee.

Ultimately, Chutkan agreed to release part of the government’s new arguments against the former president, saying the public must understand the court’s eventual decision on immunity, and therefore needs access to the government’s arguments.