President-elect Trump Meets Republican Senators On Capitol Hill

Just days before Donald Trump’s return to the White House, Special Counsel Jack Smith issued a stark warning: sufficient evidence exists to potentially convict the incoming President. 

The Justice Department’s Tuesday release of its final report details Smith’s charges that Trump illegally conspired to overturn the 2020 election. Prosecutors determined they possessed enough admissible evidence for a conviction, had Trump’s November election win not prevented the case from proceeding. The report states, “But for Mr. Trump’s election and imminent return to the presidency, the office assessed that the admissible evidence was sufficient to obtain and sustain a conviction at trial.” 

The report strongly criticizes the soon-to-be President. While many findings are not new—Trump’s attempts to remain in office after losing the 2020 election have been extensively documented—it provides another detailed account of his alleged assault on American democracy and the government he will soon lead.

Smith’s team interviewed over 250 individuals, obtained grand jury testimony from more than 55 witnesses, and noted that the House committee’s investigation findings represented only “a small part of the office’s investigative record.” The 137-page report details Trump’s efforts to obstruct the peaceful transfer of power, including pressuring officials to invalidate election results and inciting the January 6, 2021 Capitol riot. Smith alleges Trump attempted to obstruct the certification of Biden’s election “through fraud and deceit,” including by encouraging “violence against his perceived opponents.” 

“As set forth in the original and superseding indictments, when it became clear that Mr. Trump had lost the election and that lawful means of challenging the election results had failed, he resorted to a series of criminal efforts to retain power,” the report explains.

The investigation faced challenges, including legal disputes over executive privilege, the Supreme Court’s July ruling on presidential immunity, and Trump’s intimidation tactics. Smith noted, “Mr. Trump used his considerable social media presence to make extrajudicial comments—sometimes of a threatening nature—about the case, and the Office was forced to pursue litigation to preserve the integrity of the proceeding and prevent witness intimidation.”

Furthermore, the case faced public perception as politically motivated and unfolded during an election cycle. Smith wrote, “Mr. Trump’s announcement of his candidacy for president while two federal criminal investigations were ongoing presented an unprecedented challenge for the Department of Justice and the courts.”

Additional obstacles included prosecutors’ consideration of charging Trump under the Insurrection Act—a 19th-century law prohibiting rebellion against the U.S. government—but insufficient evidence of Trump’s intent to instigate the full extent of the January 6 violence ultimately prevented this.

Many individuals who committed acts of violence may avoid legal repercussions. Trump stated that one of his first acts upon assuming office will be to pardon most, if not all, defendants charged in connection with the Capitol attack. He recently told TIME, “It’s going to start in the first hour…Maybe the first nine minutes.” Conversely, Vice President-elect J.D. Vance stated on Fox News that those who “committed violence” on January 6 “obviously” shouldn’t be pardoned.

Trump’s lawyers, who viewed a draft report over a week prior, opposed its release, deeming it a politically motivated attack intended to “disrupt the presidential transition.” They also seek to prevent the release of a separate Smith report on Trump’s handling of classified documents. On Monday, Judge Aileen Cannon, a Trump appointee, temporarily blocked the release and scheduled a hearing for Friday to determine how to proceed.

However, Trump will ultimately face no consequences in either case. Smith dropped both cases following Trump’s 2024 election win, citing a Justice Department policy prohibiting the prosecution of sitting presidents. Agency regulations mandated the submission of a final report—one for each prosecution—to Attorney General Merrick Garland, who committed to publishing both documents.

With Trump’s inauguration imminent, the report’s impact will be largely limited to its historical significance. For Trump, known for his ability to evade accountability, this constitutes a victory. Trump posted on his social media platform, “Jack is a lamebrain prosecutor who was unable to get his case tried before the Election, which I won in a landslide. THE VOTERS HAVE SPOKEN!!!”