WASHINGTON — Donald Trump had a “good faith” basis for questioning the results of the 2020 election, his lawyers said as they demanded that prosecutors turn over any evidence related to voting irregularities and possible foreign interference in Democrat Joe Biden’s victory contest.
A defense motion filed late Monday in federal court in Washington argues that Trump was not required to take at face value the judgments of government officials who found no widespread fraud in the election. It raises the prospect that foreign actors could have influenced the race and claims the federal government gave the public “false assurances” about the security of the election that went beyond what was actually known.
“It was not unreasonable at the time, and certainly not criminal, for President Trump to disagree with officials now favored by the prosecutor, and instead rely on the independent judgment that the American people chose him to use while he led the country,” the lawyers said. wrote.
The filing is the clearest indication yet that Trump’s lawyers hope to cast doubt on the race’s legitimacy before a jury, or show that his skepticism was justified and not motivated by criminal intent. The lawyers are seeking permission to force Special Counsel Jack Smith’s team to hand over vast amounts of information they say could bolster his defense, including the “impact of foreign influence” and “actual and attempted compromises in election infrastructure.” as well as evidence of potential “political bias” that could have shaped the intelligence community’s assessment of the election.
Courts across the country and Trump’s attorney general found no evidence of fraud that could have affected the outcome, and the Department of Homeland Security’s cybersecurity division called it “the most secure in American history.” Smith’s team claims that Trump, a Republican, ignored all these findings and launched an illegal plot to overturn the election and block the peaceful transition of power.
But the Trump team claims in the 37-page dossier that he had reason to doubt the results.
The motion recounts Russian efforts in 2016 to undermine confidence in that year’s election, although it ignores the intelligence community’s assessment that Moscow had a “clear preference” for Trump over his Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton.
It also revisits the intelligence community’s efforts in 2020 to detect possible interference from countries such as Russia, China and Iran. It quotes a Jan. 7, 2021 memo from John Ratcliffe, then director of national intelligence and a close Trump ally, that said China was trying to influence the election. And it is seeking information from prosecutors about a Russian cyber espionage campaign in 2019 and 2020 that affected numerous federal government agencies, saying intrusions call into question the confidence expressed by officials at the time in the security of the election.
“The Bureau cannot blame President Trump for the public discord and distrust over the 2020 election results while refusing to turn over evidence that foreign actors have fanned the very same flames that the Bureau finds incriminating in the indictment.” , the motion said.
It goes on to say: “The Bureau cannot rely on select guidance and judgments from intelligence community and law enforcement officials it favors while ignoring evidence of political bias in those officials’ decision-making, as well as cyberattacks and other interference, both actual and attempted, targeting critical infrastructure and election facilities before, during and after the 2020 elections.”
Defense attorneys are also seeking to force prosecutors to turn over documents related to the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol, when pro-Trump loyalists stormed the building in a violent confrontation with police in an attempt to stop counting disrupt the electoral votes. . The lawyers are seeking, in part, statements from prosecutors that they say could contradict the Smith team’s claim that Trump was responsible for the violence at the Capitol that day.
Trump’s lawyers have already asked U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan to dismiss the charges. He said he is protected from prosecution by presidential immunity and argues the charges violate his First Amendment rights. Those requests are still pending.
