In a recent court filing, special counsel Jack Smith argued that former President Donald Trump’s comments about various public officials, including former Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Mark Milley, support their request to restrict Trump’s remarks about the federal election interference case. Smith’s team emphasized Trump’s prejudicial statements during an interview with NBC News’ “Meet the Press,” in which he targeted Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger and former U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr, both of whom are witnesses in the indictment against Trump. The filing also referred to posts on Trump’s Truth Social account, including one that attacked Milley for alleged “treasonous” conduct. Prosecutors believe that these recent remarks reinforce the need for a targeted gag order to prevent Trump from influencing the trial or prejudicing jury selection.
The special counsel’s office further highlighted social media posts by Trump that cast doubt on the fairness of U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan and the prosecutors in the case. They argue that Trump’s public maligning of witnesses and intentional comments about their potential testimony at trial could lead potential jurors to form improper views about the witnesses’ reputations and truthfulness. Smith’s team believes that the court should intervene to prevent the dissemination of such inappropriate information about the case. Trump’s attorneys, in response, accused prosecutors of attempting to silence him and deny his First Amendment rights.
Overall, the court filing presented by special counsel Jack Smith’s team reinforces their request for a gag order on Donald Trump and his restricted remarks about the federal election interference case. Trump’s recent prejudicial statements and social media posts targeting public officials and witnesses lend support to the argument that his public comments could influence the trial and prejudice the jury selection process. Smith’s team believes that a targeted gag order is necessary to prevent Trump from further impacting the outcome of the case. Trump’s attorneys, however, claim that the request for a gag order is an infringement on his First Amendment rights and an attempt to silence him. The court will hold a hearing in mid-October to discuss the potential imposition of a gag order.
