Unsealed filing reveals Trump's alleged actions on Jan. 6

AMNA NAWAZ: We're learning previously undisclosed details tonight about former President Donald Trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 election.

A newly unsealed 165-page court filing from the Department of Justice argues the former president should still face trial even after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled presidents have immunity for official acts.

NPR's Carrie Johnson and former U.S. attorney Mary McCord are following the latest developments.

They join me now.

Welcome to you both.

So, Carrie, what do we know about why this filing was unsealed now by Judge Tanya Chutkan, and what stood out to you as you made your way through it?

CARRIE JOHNSON, NPR: Yes, the Justice Department made this filing in response to what the Supreme Court did this past summer.

The Supreme Court ruled that Trump and future presidents do enjoy substantial immunity from prosecution for official acts.

But the special counsel, Jack Smith, and his team maintain that Trump was acting as a political candidate and not the president of the United States when he allegedly attempted to overturn the results of the 2020 election.

And this court filing today was filed under seal a short while ago.

There's been some back-and-forth about how much the public should be able to see.

And just this afternoon, Judge Tanya Chutkan mostly sided with prosecutors and released this filing with some redactions.

There are some new details in here based on grand jury testimony and notes that people like former Vice President Mike Pence took about his interactions with former President Donald Trump.

There's some really interesting mentions of notes that Pence took about this all being up to Pence in the later part of 2020 and early 2021 as people prepared to count the electoral votes on January 6.

And there's some new detail from prosecutors, who maintain that Trump himself was in the dining room near the Oval Office tweeting on January 6 as Mike Pence was in danger from rioters in the Capitol.

And Trump allegedly said to an aide who asked him about all this: "So what?"

So there's a lot of new color and vivid detail about Trump's alleged actions and his state of mind and his knowledge in those waning weeks of 2020 and early 2021.

AMNA NAWAZ: Mary, we knew this was an argument that Jack Smith was going to lay out, saying, even though Trump was holding the official office of president, his scheme, as he writes in the filing -- quote -- "was a fundamentally private one."

Just broadly speaking, how does he make that case here and how compelling a case is that?

MARY MCCORD, Former Justice Department Official: He goes through all of the different facets of the scheme the pressure on state legislatures, the pressure on his own vice president, the efforts to orchestrate the fraudulent electors scheme, and his comments not only at the Ellipse on the morning of January 6, but in the lead-up to that, including public speeches and tweets.

And he -- and Jack Smith emphasizes at every step how many private actors, private attorneys, and advisers, including some of his co-conspirators, were involved in so many of these efforts.

He also makes the point about there not being executive branch officials involved in these various efforts.

And he also adds, I think, some really interesting details, to go to Carrie's point about showing his capacity as a candidate.

He adds details about, when he's pressuring state legislatures, for example, and state government officials, he is, for one, only pressuring Republicans.

He never calls, for example, the Michigan Democratic governor or secretary of state to complain about election fraud.

He only pressures Republicans.

And in those states that are led by Democrats, he instead pressures state legislatures.

He constantly refers only to his own race when he talks about fraud in the election and never to the election more generally.

So, in other words, claims of election integrity, you would expect to be calling into question a number of different facets of the election, but, instead, he focused only on himself.

So, Jack Smith really does paint quite a vivid picture throughout not only the first part of this motion, which includes this extensive factual recitation, but particularly in his legal analysis and his application of the law, the law that the Supreme Court laid down in Trump v. United States, to the facts of this case.

AMNA NAWAZ: Carrie, I want to underscore here that moment you briefly mentioned about Mr. Trump's reaction to learning that his vice president had been taken to a secure location.

Here is what is actually written out in the filing related to that.

Jack Smith writes that: "Upon receiving a phone call, learning that Pence had been taken to a secure location, a redacted person rushed to the dining room to inform the defendants in hopes the defendant would take action to ensure Pence's safety.

Instead, after he delivered the news, the defendant," in this case, former President Trump, "looked at him and said only: 'So what?'"

What else do we learn from this, Carrie, about the many efforts Vice President Pence made to offer then-President Trump an off-ramp from these false claims of election fraud?

CARRIE JOHNSON: Yes, we learned a lot about conversations that Pence had with Trump, as well as Pence's aides, who met with some of Trump's alleged co-conspirators, people we believe to be former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, law professor John Eastman, and others who were advancing these bogus claims.

And after they tried all kinds of other efforts in the courts and with the states, they basically failed at all of those things, and it came down for them to Mike Pence.

And so they placed enormous pressure on Pence, tried to signal that he had the power to overturn the will of millions of voters.

And Pence wasn't buying it.

Nor was one of his legal aides who's testified before the house January 6 Committee.

And we get a lot of detail about that.

Pence basically says to Trump, why don't you try again?

Take this -- sit this one out.

You can try again in 2024.

And Trump and his top aides were just not having it.

In fact, Trump called Pence on January 5 and the morning of January 6 asked him to be tough.

And Pence was under enormous pressure, as we saw in that period, but, still, he held firm and refused to go along with this alleged scheme.

AMNA NAWAZ: Mary, there are some newly disclosed details in here, some newly confirmed details.

Much of it was also known from the results of the January 6 hearings.

But the big question is, now what?

What kind of impact will this filing have on the case moving forward?

MARY MCCORD: Right.

So now it will be Mr. Trump's legal counsel's turn to file a response to this and make arguments in opposition to Jack Smith's arguments.

So he has argued that, for each facet of the scheme, Mr. Trump's conduct -- well, first of all, for his pressure on his vice president, where the Supreme Court said that could -- that's official, they have made a showing and an argument that they can rebut the presumption of immunity by showing through the evidence that prosecution for this illegal pressure on Mike Pence would not create any danger of intrusion the functions of the presidency.

For every other category, he argues that acts are private and not official.

And even if the court were to find they were official, again, he can rebut the presumption of immunity by showing prosecution would have no danger of intrusion the functions of the presidency.

And this is something that Justice Amy Coney Barrett, in her concurring opinion, she pointed out some areas that she thought were private and said if she had -- she thought the majority should have said so in its opinion, and some areas where she thought the presumption was rebutted.

AMNA NAWAZ: That is former U.S. attorney Mary McCord and NPR's Carrie Johnson joining us tonight.

Thank you to you both.