Special Counsel Jack Smith has unveiled a substantial body of evidence against Donald Trump, seeking a gag order in the classified documents case. In court filings on June 26, federal prosecutors compiled numerous exhibits to support their argument for Judge Aileen Cannon to impose restrictions on Trump’s public statements.
The request comes amidst Trump’s plea of not guilty to 40 charges, including allegations of unlawfully retaining classified materials and obstructing federal retrieval efforts post-presidency.
The urgency for a gag order surged following Trump’s baseless claim that President Joe Biden had authorized the FBI to use deadly force during a search at Mar-a-Lago last August. This falsehood, which Trump amplified in a fundraising email, sparked concerns of inciting violence against law enforcement officials.
Federal prosecutors underscored the gravity of Trump’s rhetoric, arguing that it jeopardizes the safety of law enforcement personnel. They pointed to Trump’s social media posts and public remarks, which they claim have engendered threats and intimidation towards judges and court staff.
The Department of Justice’s submissions included alarming incidents such as threats made against judges overseeing cases involving Trump, including Judge Tanya Chutkan and Judge Arthur Engoron. These threats included targeted attacks on their homes and ominous voicemails, illustrating the volatile climate exacerbated by Trump’s statements.
Additionally, prosecutors highlighted instances where Trump’s supporters allegedly acted on his inflammatory rhetoric. One such case involved an attempted attack on an FBI office in Ohio shortly after Trump lambasted the agency for conducting the Mar-a-Lago search. The suspect, Ricky Shiffer, posted a threat on social media before being fatally shot by police.
Smith’s team also detailed Timothy Muller’s recent charges for threatening an FBI agent, citing Muller’s dissemination of debunked claims about the 2020 election being stolen, echoing Trump’s persistent and divisive narratives.
Smith emphasized the dangers posed by Trump’s statements, labeling them as not only inflammatory but potentially harmful to law enforcement and judicial processes. He argued that a gag order is necessary to mitigate these risks and ensure the safety of all involved in the legal proceedings.
In response, Trump and his legal team have pushed back, asserting that such restrictions would violate his First Amendment rights, particularly in the context of his 2024 White House campaign.
