“The office recognized why courts described the attack on the Capitol as an ‘insurrection,’ but it was also aware of the litigation risk that would be presented by employing this long-dormant statute,” Smith explained.
Evidence showed that violence “was foreseeable” to Trump, and “he caused it, that it was beneficial to his plan to interfere with the certification, and that when it occurred, he made a conscious choice not to stop it and instead to leverage it for more delay,” according to the report.
The law and the country weren’t prepared for a case showing how a sitting president, not an outside force, could be responsible, Alex Woodward reports.
Why didn’t Jack Smith charge Trump with insurrection?
Evidence shows Trump ‘caused and benefited’ from the violent attack.
