The new filings are part of a monthslong legal battle between the company now called X and the special counsel’s team.
Federal prosecutors secretly argued in April that if Donald Trump learned of their efforts to access his Twitter account, his public disclosure of the development could “precipitate violence.”
Newly unsealed court filings show that attorneys working for special counsel Jack Smith worried that Trump would publicly announce the search warrant of his Twitter feed just like he announced on Truth Social when his Mar-a-Lago estate was searched by the FBI last year. That announcement was followed by a surge in threats against federal law enforcement, culminating in the fatal shooting of a man who had attempted to breach an FBI building in Cincinnati.
Informing Trump about the Twitter search warrant “could precipitate violence as occurred following the public disclosure of the search warrant executed at Mar-a-Lago,” the prosecutors warned.
The new filings, part of a monthslong legal battle between Twitter, now called X, and the special counsel’s team over whether the social media company, newly purchased by Elon Musk, could inform Trump about the search warrant the investigators had obtained before it complied with its directives. The company suggested that some of Trump’s private communications on the platform could be subject to executive privilege and wanted to afford him to opportunity to assert it.
But prosecutors — and ultimately U.S. District Court Judge Beryl Howell — scoffed at that suggestion and sharply rejected Twitter’s notion that Trump’s account might contain privileged material. Howell held Twitter in contempt in February and fined the company $350,000 for missing court-ordered deadlines to comply with the prosecutors’ search warrant. Ultimately, the company provided the documents Smith’s prosecutors demanded.
In the new filings, Smith’s team revealed that Trump’s account included just 32 direct messages, “a minuscule” proportion of the overall data it had obtained. Prosecutors also obtained data that could show Trump’s location at the time certain tweets were sent or whether anyone else was accessing his account.
But the newly unsealed filings provide new details Smith’s arguments for keeping Trump in the dark about the search warrant — primarily that Trump presents a “significant risk of tampering with evidence, seeking to influence or intimidate potential witnesses, and ‘otherwise seriously jeopardizing’ the Government’s ongoing investigations.”
“These are not hypothetical considerations in this case,” the prosecutors wrote in a 71-page brief dated April 21. “Following his defeat in the 2020 presidential election, the former President propagated false claims of fraud (including swearing to false allegations in a federal court filing), pressured state and federal officials to violate their legal duties, and retaliated against those who did not comply with his demands, culminating in violence at the U.S. Capitol on January 6.”
Smith’s team also cited the charges against Trump for seeking to “undermine or otherwise influence the investigation into the potential mishandling of classified information following the end of his presidency, including publicizing the existence of the Mar-a-Lago warrant.”
……..
- Discussion
-
Prosecutors argue Trump knowledge of Twitter search warrant could ‘precipitate violence’ https://t.co/8O1bCvjZz6
— POLITICO (@politico) September 15, 2023
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.