“Illegal”: Trump explodes on Truth Social after Jack Smith corners him on Jan. 6 conspiracy theory

Special counsel Jack Smith’s team on Wednesday asked U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan to bar former President Donald Trump from introducing “irrelevant disinformation” into his D.C. election subversion trial.

Smith’s team filed a motion in limine urging Chutkan to prohibit Trump from using certain arguments he has made publicly in his defense. Prosecutors say the arguments are wrong and irrelevant and could mislead jurors.

Smith’s team specifically asked the judge to ban Trump from blaming law enforcement failures for the Jan. 6 Capitol attack, claiming that he is the target of political prosecution, or spreading claims that undercover federal agents or informants were responsible for the violence in the attack.

“Although the Court can recognize these efforts for what they are and disregard them, the jury — if subjected to them — may not,” the filing said. “The Court should not permit the defendant to turn the courtroom into a forum in which he propagates irrelevant disinformation, and should reject his attempt to inject politics into this proceeding.”

Prosecutors have filed similar motions in hundreds of trials for Capitol rioters, The Washington Post noted.

The filing came after Chutkan paused the case as Trump asks an appeals court to grant him presidential immunity from prosecution. It is unclear if Chutkan will consider Smith’s filing while the case is paused but it would be taken up quickly if Trump’s immunity claim is ultimately rejected. Legal experts told the Post that Trump’s attorneys and prosecutors would not be able to appeal Chutkan’s ruling on the matter until after the trial is concluded.

Trump on Truth Social claimed that the filing is “illegal” because the case is paused.

“Deranged Jack is so Viciously and Desperately Angry that the Supreme Court just unanimously rejected his flailing attempt to rush this Witch Hunt, that he is ignoring the Law and clear instructions from the D.C. Court that this ‘case’ should be stayed, and there cannot be any more filings,” Trump wrote. “Today’s pathetic motion is not just Illegal, it is also another Unconstitutional attempt to take away my First Amendment Rights, and to prevent me from saying the TRUTH — that all of these Hoaxes are nothing but a political persecution of me, the MAGA Movement, and the Republican Party by Crooked Joe and his Despicable Thugs.”

Legal experts say Chutkan could make things difficult for Trump by ruling in favor of Smith. Former U.S. Attorney Harry Litman pointed out that Smith is also asking the court to exclude “testimony regarding the defendant’s alleged state of mind.”

Trump’s state of mind is “hugely relevant to the charges.  And he's trotted out several different versions of why he didn't have the requisite intent,” Litman tweeted.

While such evidence can typically be introduced through the defendant’s own testimony explaining his state of mind, “Trump can’t testify,” Litman wrote. “It would be a bloodbath, walking him through the greatest hits of his 1000s of lies, and exposing him to a perjury-fest.”

While Trump’s lawyers may seek to ask witnesses for their impression of Trump’s state of mind, Smith’s motion “methodically seals up different avenues that Trump could try,” Litman explained.

“If Chutkan rules for Smith, it's hard to see how Trump can sneak in evidence of his state of mind,” he added. “But, like the lead argument in the motion to keep Trump from making irrelevant political charges, this will be an area where, if Chutkan grants the motion, Trump will try all kinds of sneaky maneuvers at trial to get around it.”

Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.

But former federal prosecutor Renato Mariotti predicted that it would be difficult to enforce the evidence rules given who the defendant is.

"All of that information, all of those allegations, all of those opinions would be totally irrelevant and prejudicial and should not be allowed,” Mariotti told CNN.

"That said, prosecutors keep defense attorneys from saying things that are inappropriate in trial and defense attorneys find ways to say them anyway," he explained. "It will be interesting to see how that plays out at trial. My suspicion is that Judge Chutkan will try very hard to shut down these irrelevant arguments and assertions, that have nothing to do with the facts of the case specifically and whether or not he's guilty as charged."

Mariotti added that “it'll be harder for her to actually rein in the defense counsel, and I suspect that they are going to push against her and get her and get out what they want to get out in front of the jury, even if it means drawing the ire of the judge."