Special Counsel Jack Smith, 55, indicted former President Donald Trump on four charges Aug. 1, parroting recommendations of the Jan. 6 House Select Committee, insisting Trump planned and orchestrated the Jan. 6 Capitol insurrection. Jan. 6 House Committee, largely partisan Democrats with two anti-Trump Republicans former Reps. Liz Cheney (R-Wy.) and Adam Kinzinger, repeated Trump’s second impeachment for “incitement of insurrection.” Since Trump was acquitted in the U.S. Senate Feb. 13, 2021, Democrats, lied by former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), tried again in the Jan. 6 House Select Committee to charge-and-convict Trump of planning-and-orchestrating the Jan. 6 Capitol riots. Only one minor problem, Smith assumes facts not in evidence, something strictly prohibited as admissible in criminal trials.
Nearly two years of investigations, including testimony and emails from literally hundreds of witnesses, could not tie Trump to the Jan. 6 capitol riots. All they found are hateful opinions of anti-Trump persons, willing to do and say anything, like the committee itself, to charge-and-convict Trump. When it comes to Smith’s recent charges, they’re a Democrat wish list but not facts. Smith charged Trump with defrauding the U.S. government and obstructing the Jan. 6, 2021 Electoral College certification, including obstructing an official government business. Smith has no facts that link Trump to the Jan. 6 riots other than wild conjecture by Democrats and their friends in the press. Now it turns out, according to George Washington Constitutional law professor Jonathan Turley that Smith’s charges of Trump are all protected by Trump’s First Amendment rights,
Smith’s charges mirror the Jan. 6 House Committee, accusing Trump of planning-and-orchestrating the Jan. 6 insurrection. Smith and the committee don’t consider the real motives behind the Jan. 6 Capitol riots, not to interfere with certification of the Electoral College vote but to protest a summer of Black Lives Matter rioting in major U.S. cities, looting, arson, violence against federal buildings and taking over parts of U.S. cities. Smith and Democrats didn’t consider that the riots planned for months by groups like Oathkeepers, Proud Boys and others were about the government accepting Black rioting in the wake of George Floyd’s May 25, 2020 death. House Democrats and the press refuse to accept that the Jan. 6 riots were not an attempt to overthrow the U.S. government but a statement that Whites can also protest loudly and riot like their Black counterparts.
Turley called out Smith for criminalizing Free Speech under the First Amendment whether or not Democrat like Trump tells a bunch of lies. Political rhetoric is expressly accepted as Free Speech, whether it’s accepted by political opponents or not. Smith wants to criminalize the fact that Trump sees the 2020 election as fixed or rigged by Democrats and the press. Democrats like to say that not one court found widespread election fraud in the 2020 presidential election, electing 80-year-old President Joe Biden. Democrats and the press cherry pick their narrative, especially that Trump planned and orchestrated the Jan. 6 Capitol riots. But the House Select Committee couldn’t prove that Trump had anything to do with planning-or-orchestrating the Jan. 6 Capitol riots. Yet Democrats and the press don’t call themselves liars for having a strong opinion about Jan. 6, 2021 Capitol riots,
Pointing out that political speech, whether proved false or not, is protected under the First Amendment, Turley identifies Constitutional grounds to invalidate Smith’s arbitrary-and-capricious charges. Not only is Trump entitled to his views of what happened Nov. 3, 2020, he can freely talk about without charged with the “Big Lie.” Democrats and the media accused Trump of lying about the 2020 presidential election. But Democrats and the press don’t question the use of universal mail-in ballots, where millions of unverified ballots went out to registered Democrats, Republicans and independents, whether they were registered or not. “Trump is allowed to seek out enablers who all tell him what he wants to hear,” Turley said, questioning Smith’s Aug. 1 Jan. 6 charges. Turley speaks only of Constitutional grounds not challenging Smith’s fact no in evidence.
Raising Constitutional questions open a can of worms for Smith succeeding in trying-and-convicting Trump for “defrauding” the government. Turley points out that Trump is entitled under the First Amendment to harbor any beliefs, even if they don’t match his enemies. Smith’s bigger problem in a criminal proceeding, requiring guilt-beyond-a-reasonable doubt with a unanimous jury, is that he doesn’t have the facts that Trump planned and orchestrated the Jan. 6 Capitol riots. Democrats lost their impeachment case of “incitement of insurrection” Feb. 13, 2021. Hoping to make their case now that Trump planned-and-orchestrated the Jan. 6 insurrection won’t be easy. Whatever White nationalist groups-or-individuals did to vandalize the Capitol, Smith can’t prove that Trump urged them to commit violence. Smithi’s case against Trump looks like it’s full of holes.
About the Author
John M. Curtis writes politically neutral commentary analyzing spin in national and global news. He’s editor of OnlineColumnist.com and author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma.
