JUST IN: Jack Smith Seeks to Introduce Evidence Against Trump That Isn’t Charged in Indictment

Special Counsel Jack Smith is now seeking to introduce evidence against Trump that isn’t even charged in the indictment.

In September Trump was hit with 4 counts in Jack Smith’s January 6 case up in DC: Conspiracy to defraud the United States, conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, obstruction of and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding, and conspiracy against rights.

Jack Smith asked Judge Tanya Chutkan to allow his prosecutors to tell DC jurors about Trump’s statements on prior elections.

Government prosecutors said Trump’s previous, First Amendment-protected statements claiming the 2012 and 2016 presidential elections were stolen are part of a pattern and led to an effort to ‘overturn’ the 2020 election.

“They demonstrate the defendant’s common plan of falsely blaming fraud for election results he does not like,” the special counsel’s prosecutor wrote in a 9-page filing.

Only Hillary Clinton and the Democrats are allowed to claim the 2016 election was stolen.

Jack Smith’s prosecutors also want to tell jurors that Trump’s statements defending jailed J6 protestors and vowing to pardon them are proof he incited a riot.

“This evidence shows that the rioters’ disruption of the certification proceeding is exactly what the defendant intended on January 6,” Jack Smith’s prosecutor wrote, according to Politico.

Excerpt from far-left Politico:

Special counsel Jack Smith wants a Washington, D.C. jury to hear about Donald Trump’s efforts to sow false doubts about the two presidential elections that preceded his failed 2020 campaign.

The special counsel’s team says Trump’s previous attempts to convince Americans that the elections of 2012 and 2016 were being stolen laid the foundation for what would become a criminal effort to overturn the 2020 election after his loss to Joe Biden.

Smith is seeking permission from U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan to introduce evidence that isn’t specifically charged in the criminal indictment but may be relevant to the jury’s consideration of the alleged crimes. These details, known as 404(b) evidence, are commonly introduced in criminal matters to aid the jury’s ability to consider a defendant’s intent or motive based on uncharged “bad acts.” In this case, Smith says the evidence will help jurors assess Trump’s intent during the frenzied weeks before the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, as he sought to subvert the election.