In a 22-page filing on Friday, senior assistant special counsel Molly Gaston argued that recent attacks by Donald Trump on Gen. Mark Milley and one of their newly appointed prosecutors support their case to impose a gag order on the former president ahead of his trial in Washington, D.C.
Silencing Trump’s Prejudicial Statements
The special counsel’s office has proposed the gag order not to silence Trump’s campaign but to prevent him from using his candidacy as a platform for making prejudicial public statements about the case. Gaston emphasized that there’s no legitimate need for Trump to attack known witnesses regarding their anticipated testimony during his campaign.
“No other criminal defendant would be permitted to issue public statements insinuating that a known witness in his case should be executed,” Gaston wrote.
Upcoming Hearing and Witness Intimidation
The filing serves as the prosecutors’ final word to U.S. District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan before an Oct. 16 hearing on the proposed gag order. Since the initial request was unsealed, Trump has launched a social media attack on Gen. Milley, a potential witness in the case against him.
Prosecutors argue that Trump’s attacks constitute witness intimidation and could taint the jury pool for his upcoming trial scheduled for March 4. Judge Chutkan has cautioned Trump against making “inflammatory” comments about the case and has suggested she might expedite his trial if such comments persist. Recently, Chutkan also denied Trump’s attempt to remove her from the case.
Tainting the Upcoming Trial
Trump’s attacks on the special counsel’s office and even on the judge herself are seen as potential threats that could taint the upcoming trial or incite dangerous threats. Prosecutors firmly reject attempts by Trump’s advisers to explain away his statements, including one suggesting he purchased a firearm in South Carolina, a potential violation of federal law considering his criminal indictment.
Clear Links to January 6 Events
The special counsel’s office also rejected Trump’s argument that the indictment doesn’t formally accuse him of having a role in the January 6 events. They assert that the indictment clearly links Trump and his actions, including knowingly false claims of election fraud, to the events of January 6.
COMMENTS