Former President Donald Trump has revealed that on July 16 he received an official letter warning of more legal jeopardy for him. It came from Special Counsel Jack Smith, who is leading the investigation into Trump’s alleged mishandling of classified documents. The 45th president already faces multiple charges related to that matter, but Smith informed him that he is also the target of a Department of Justice investigation into the events of January 6, 2021, at the Capitol and alleged efforts to reverse the result of the 2020 presidential election. According to media reports, a government source has confirmed that the letter was indeed dispatched to Trump. On his Truth Social platform, Trump wrote in part:
"Deranged Jack Smith, prosecutor with Joe Biden's DOJ, sent a letter (again it was a Sunday night!) stating that I am the TARGET of the January 6th Grand Jury Investigation, and giving me a very short four days to report to the Grand Jury, which almost always means an arrest and indictment."
Trump and January 6
Legal pundits are speculating that Trump might be charged with seditious conspiracy. One must assume that the DOJ has more evidence to go on than claims the 2020 election was rigged if it is to make such a charge stick. Presumably, the Justice Department has hard evidence of some planning or conspiratorial activities involving Trump and other parties prior to January 6. One man cannot conspire alone.
If that is not the case and the now-anticipated grand jury indictment is based on remarks Trump made prior to and on that fateful day in Washington, DC, then the DOJ is apparently attempting to criminalize political speech. Questioning the outcome of an election, after all, is not sedition. If it was, then quite a few prominent Democrats would be behind bars at this point. Telling one’s supporters that they must “fight like hell” for their country, as Trump did on January 6, is not incitement of anything. Again, if it were, then plenty of Democrats – and other Republicans – would be doing time.
Some Republicans and conservative media figures quickly weighed in on the matter. On Twitter, Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton described being “harassed for hours” by Smith’s grand jury about the 2020 election. He added, "Having witnessed firsthand their abuse of power, no surprise these partisans now want to arrest Trump on political charges. This is a dire threat to the rule of law." Radio host Mark Levin described it as an “undeniable DOJ/FBI campaign to destroy Trump and re-elect Biden.”
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) tweeted: “The continued politicization and weaponization of the Department of Justice has turned our institutions into enforcers for the Biden administration’s partisan priorities,” adding, “It remains deeply harmful to the rule of law.”
(Photo by Chris Unger/Zuffa LLC via Getty Images)
None of this is a laughing matter, considering that it is now becoming difficult to claim the continued hounding of Trump is not about eliminating Joe Biden’s most likely opponent from the 2024 presidential contest. Still, Federalist co-founder Sean Davis came up with a sarcastic take on the news. Referring to Hunter Biden’s many shady activities, Davis tweeted:
“Kind of crazy to think that had [Trump] illegally bought a gun, lied on the background check form, laundered money, evaded taxes, accepted bribes from foreign oligarchs, and smuggled cocaine into the WH, DOJ would’ve looked the other way. Instead he told people to protest peacefully.”
Questioning the legitimacy of election outcomes is nothing new. Democrats did it in 2000 after George W. Bush beat Al Gore. They did it in 2016 when Trump beat Hillary Clinton – even attempting to halt the certification of the Electoral College votes. Also, various Democrats and a few Republicans at the state level have disputed the results of elections they lost. But when it comes to the 2020 presidential election, Democrats have directed the full force of government and the legal system against those who believed the result was tainted. Given their past willingness to cast doubt on election results, why are they suddenly so adamant that questioning a vote count is entirely taboo?
.jpg&w=1920&q=75)
