Trump would be guilty without the election, according to Jack Smith

Much of the final report from special counsel Jack Smith’s investigation into Trump’s attempt to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election and stay in power has finally been made public.

Jack Smith states that it is evident, in his opinion, that Trump would have been found guilty based on the overwhelming evidence gathered in this case.

The federal charges against Trump were dropped when he won the presidential election. However, a final report, which Trump tried to keep confidential until the end, has finally been published.

According to Smith, the evidence gathered against Trump was sufficient to convict him.

Jack Smith emphasizes that the only reason keeping Trump from a certain conviction is the long-standing policy of the Justice Department that prohibits prosecuting a sitting president, which forced him to drop his case against him.

It should be noted that Smith had to face relentless attacks from Trump and his allies, but he claims to have remained impartial in his work.

According to him, acting otherwise in light of the facts gathered in this case would have been a failure in his duties as a prosecutor and a public servant.

After nearly 30 years of public service, he states that it was a decision he could not accept.

The report also explains why Trump was not charged with inciting an insurrection during the now-infamous day of January 6, 2021.

Investigators in the case were unable to prove that he participated in this offense, nor establish direct evidence showing that Trump intended to provoke the scale of the violence that occurred that day.

It should be noted that Jack Smith’s final report was submitted to the Justice Department on January 7, and that Smith resigned on January 10, a few days before Donald Trump’s official inauguration at the White House.