唐纳德·特朗普联邦法院的法官机密文件案周一，特别顾问杰克·史密斯要求对这位前总统在此案中对执法部门的言论实施有限的禁言令，但他似乎对检察官的说法持怀疑态度。
检察官辩称，有限的禁言令是必要的，以防止前总统邀请执法人员采取“暴力行为”，声称当他就美国联邦调查局2022年8月发表虚假声明时，他知道“他的一些支持者的可预见反应”Mar-a-Lago搜索-包括一份竞选声明，称乔·拜登总统“被锁定”&准备带我出去&把我的家人置于危险之中。"
特朗普的首席辩护律师托德·布兰奇(Todd Blanche)辩称，特朗普的言论对执法部门没有迫在眉睫和可预见的危险，并表示，这将为被告因被认为是政治言论的事情而修改保释开创一个“危险”的先例。
布兰奇认为特朗普的评论是“对其政治对手的批评”...乔·拜登和他的司法部”，对他的保释的任何修改都将“对特朗普总统产生寒蝉效应”
检察官大卫·哈巴赫(David Harbach)进行了反击，认为特朗普的评论没有任何可以被视为竞选言论的内容。
特朗普能“利用他的平台增加他当选总统的机会吗?请自便!Harbach说，但是你不能说这种“明显错误”的话。
“谎言。关于美国联邦调查局要对你的家人施暴的谎言。在我们看来，这太过分了，”他说。
艾琳·坎农法官要求检察官拿出证据，证明拟议中的禁声令符合宪法。
“最重要的是，它以完全误导性的措辞谈论了一个对本案至关重要的事件，”哈巴赫辩称。“政府无法想象特朗普先生会说出如此错误的话...和招致报复性暴力。”
"你在附件的什么地方看到了对暴力的呼吁?"坎农在批评检察官没有从特朗普的其他刑事和民事案件中拿出充足的行为模式证据后做出了回应。
法宝不服罪去年有40项刑事指控与他离开白宫后处理机密材料有关，此前检察官表示，他多次拒绝归还数百份包含机密信息的文件，并采取措施阻挠政府收回文件的努力。特朗普否认了所有指控，并谴责调查是政治迫害。
坎农敦促哈巴克修改特朗普的释放条件，而不是像前总统联邦选举干预案那样单独发布禁言令，这将避免与第一修正案有关的问题。
"释放条件还需要符合宪法吗?"坎农问。"第一修正案在宪法中."
坎农还对特朗普的言论对执法人员的影响表示怀疑，强调任何公开文件都包括对执法人员姓名和身份信息的编辑。Harbach回应称，一些特工此前被doxed，并形容特朗普最近的言论“不负责任”。
Harbach认为“从现在到审判之间存在着巨大的危险...“由于特朗普的行为，某种暴力行为将会发生”，并表示坎农需要对特朗普的言论施加限制，以保护诉讼程序的完整性。当坎农建议等到审判时再对言论施加任何限制时，哈巴赫认为立即采取行动是必要的。
“事情已经过去了...被告的行为，”哈巴赫说。
听证会的第一个小时不时引发争议，因为坎农催促哈巴赫提供证据和细节。
“我不喜欢你的语气，”坎农一度告诉哈巴赫。"我希望法庭上任何时候都要有礼貌。"
“我不是故意不专业的。我为此道歉，”哈巴赫后来说
这位特别顾问提出禁言令的请求之前，特朗普在2022年8月搜查特朗普的Mar-a-Lago庄园寻找机密文件期间，对联邦特工使用武力政策的言论升级了一个月。
在上个月的一份文件中，史密斯辩称，特朗普关于执法人员的言论是“密谋暗杀他是故意的错误和误导，并且“把目标放在美国联邦调查局特工的背上”。"
特朗普的辩护律师回应了这一请求，声称检察官未能证明特朗普的言论导致了对执法部门的任何实质性威胁或骚扰。
呼应前总统在他的纽约对限制言论自由的辩护刑事封口费案特朗普的律师写道，拟议的禁言令——他们称之为“令人震惊的过度和无视宪法的表现”——相当于政治干预，因为它限制了特朗普在本周总统辩论和7月共和党全国代表大会之前的言论。
辩护律师在6月份的一份文件中表示，“该动议赤裸裸地试图对核心政治言论实施极权主义审查，并以监禁相威胁，显然是为了压制特朗普总统向美国人民提出的关于这次调查和起诉的残暴性质的论点。”。
禁声令听证会是在周一上午继续在周五的听证会上，辩护律师试图驳回文件案，理由是史密斯被非法任命为特别顾问。
坎农将于周二恢复听证会-首先是一场密封的听证会，然后是一场关于从Mar-a-Lago搜索中获得的证据的使用的公开听证会。
虚假且极度危险
特朗普最近发表了与Mar-a-Lago搜查有关的公开声明，其间特工发现了100多份带有机密标记的文件，强调了突袭期间的武力使用政策，特朗普多次将这一政策与“拜登的DOJ”联系在一起
检察官认为，执法部门采用了司法部的标准使用武力政策，该政策允许“当警察有理由相信这种武力的对象对警察或其他人构成迫在眉睫的死亡或严重身体伤害的危险时”使用武力。
在提交的文件中，史密斯还强调，搜查被安排在特朗普和他的家人不在Mar-a-Lago的淡季，并且是在特勤局和Mar-a-Lago工作人员的协调下进行的，特朗普的律师在搜查执行前得到了通知。
美国联邦调查局罕见地公开指责发表声明上个月证实，执法部门在突袭中使用了与使用致命武力相关的标准协议，并补充说，“没有人下令采取额外的措施，在这件事上没有偏离规范。”
司法部长梅里克·加兰(Merrick Garland)也表示，对DOJ授权暗杀川普的指控是“错误的，极其危险的”，并补充说，在搜查拜登总统的家在调查他保留机密文件期间。
对执法人员的威胁
检察官强调，拟议中的针对特朗普的禁言令将受到严格限制——仅禁止特朗普谎称“美国联邦调查局特工打算谋杀他和他的家人”——以保护执法人员的安全。
为了说明对执法人员的威胁，检察官声称特朗普的言论鼓励一名支持者做出对一名美国联邦调查局特工的威胁与亨特·拜登案有关，包括威胁说，如果川普没有赢得2024年大选，他的支持者将“追捕你”和“屠杀你”。
检察官还辩称，特朗普的支持者袭击了美国联邦调查局办事处2022年8月，在突袭Mar-a-Lago后，在辛辛那提用AR-15和射钉枪进行了袭击，检察官表示，特朗普在突袭后在社交媒体上的评论部分引发了这次袭击。
辩护律师写道，特朗普参与了他的“受宪法保护的竞选言论”，检察官未能证明特朗普的言论直接导致了威胁或骚扰。
除了强调两个威胁或暴力的例子，检察官还广泛认为，特朗普关于突袭的煽动性语言创造了一种“易燃气氛”，对执法构成了直接风险。
“没有一家法院会容忍另一名被告故意给执法安全造成如此直接的风险，本法院不应该等到悲剧事件发生后再采取行动，”检察官在上周的一份文件中表示。
特朗普的其他禁言令
特朗普在挑战他的其他刑事和民事案件中实施的禁言令方面总体上不成功，偶尔会确保这些命令的暂缓执行，但未能以违宪为由推翻这些命令。
纽约最高法院拒绝接受特朗普在特朗普民事欺诈案中对禁言令的挑战，该禁令禁止特朗普对司法人员发表评论。
上周，同一个法庭拒绝立即考虑特朗普在他的纽约州封口费案件中对禁言令的挑战——该禁令禁止特朗普就陪审员、证人和其他涉案人员发表言论——此前确定特朗普的挑战“没有直接涉及实质性的宪法问题”。一个中级上诉法院上个月发现，禁言令“恰当地权衡了请愿者的第一修正案权利与法院确保司法公正的历史承诺。”
特朗普还在他的联邦选举干预案中质疑禁止发表关于史密斯、证人和法院工作人员以外的检察官的言论的禁令，但没有成功。
“鉴于本案的记录，法院有责任采取积极行动，防止制造恐惧或恐吓气氛，以阻止审判参与者和工作人员在审判过程中履行职责，”华盛顿特区上诉法院法官小组去年在一份支持禁言令的命令中写道。
Prosecutors say gag order is needed to keep Trump from inviting 'violent act' on law enforcement
The judge in Donald Trump's federalclassified documents casedid not rule from the bench Monday on special counsel Jack Smith's request to impose a limited gag order on the former president's rhetoric toward law enforcement involved in the case, but appeared skeptical of prosecutors' arguments.
Prosecutors argued that a limited gag order was necessary to prevent the former president from inviting a "violent act" on law enforcement agents, claiming that was aware of the "predictable response of some of his supporters" when he made false statements about the FBI's August 2022search of Mar-a-Lago-- including a campaign statement that President Joe Biden was "locked& loaded ready to take me out& put my family in danger."
Trump's lead defense attorney Todd Blanche argued that there is no imminent and foreseeable danger to law enforcement stemming from Trump's comments, and said that it would set a "dangerous" precedent for a defendant to have their bail modified for something that is considered political speech.
Blanche argued Trump's comments are "a critique of his political rival ... Joe Biden and his Justice Department," and that any modification of his bail would have a "chilling effect on President Trump."
Prosecutor David Harbach shot back, arguing there's nothing about Trump's comments that could be considered campaign speech.
Could Trump "use his platform to enhance his chances of being president? Knock yourself out! But you don't get to say things like this" that are "so manifestly false," Harbach said.
"Lies. Lies about the FBI coming to do violence to your family. In our opinion, that is way over the line," he said.
Judge Aileen Cannon challenged the prosecutor to produce evidence and justify the constitutionality of the proposed gag order.
"The most important thing is it talks about an event that is central to this case in utterly misleading terms," Harbach argued. "The government is at a loss to conceive any possible reason Mr. Trump would say something so false ... and inviting of retributive violence."
"Where on the attachments do you see a call for violence?" Cannon responded after criticizing prosecutors for not producing ample evidence of a pattern of conduct from Trump's other criminal and civil cases.
Trumppleaded not guiltylast year to 40 criminal counts related to his handling of classified materials after leaving the White House, after prosecutors said he repeatedly refused to return hundreds of documents containing classified information and took steps to thwart the government's efforts to get the documents back. Trump has denied all charges and denounced the probe as a political witch hunt.
Cannon pressed Harbarch on the argument that a modification of Trump's release conditions -- rather than a standalone gag order like in the former president's federal election interference case -- would avoid issues related to the First Amendment.
"Do conditions of release still need to comport with the Constitution?" Cannon asked. "The First Amendment is in the Constitution."
Cannon also expressed skepticism about the impact of Trump's statements on the law enforcement officers, highlighting that any public filings included redactions for the names and identifying information of law enforcement agents. Harbach responded by arguing that some agents were previously doxed, and described Trump's recent statements as "beyond irresponsible."
Harbach argued that there is "ample danger between now and trial ... that some sort of violent act will occur" because of Trump's conduct, and said that Cannon needed to impose the restrictions on Trump's speech to protect the integrity of the proceedings. When Cannon suggested waiting until trial to impose any restrictions on speech, Harbach argued immediate action was necessary.
"That die has already been cast ... by defendant's conduct," Harbach said.
The first hour of the hearing grew contentious at times, as Cannon pushed Harbach for evidence and details.
"I don't appreciate your tone," Cannon told Harbach at one point. "I expect decorum in this courtroom at all times."
"I didn't mean to be unprofessional. I apologize for that," Harbach later said
The request for a gag order by the special counsel follows a month of escalating rhetoric from Trump about federal agents' use-of-force policy during their August 2022 search of Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate for classified documents.
In a filing last month, Smith argued that Trump's statements that law enforcement officers were "complicit in a plot to assassinate him" were intentionally false and misleading, and "put a target on the backs of the FBI agents."
Trump's defense attorneys responded to the request by claiming that prosecutors have failed to demonstrate that Trump's statements resulted in any material threats or harassment against law enforcement.
Echoing the former president's defense against the limited gag order in his New Yorkcriminal hush money case, Trump's lawyers wrote that the proposed gag order -- which they describe as a "shocking display of overreach and disregard for the Constitution" -- amounts to political interference by limiting Trump's statements ahead of this week's presidential debate and the Republican National Convention in July.
"[T]he motion is a naked effort to impose totalitarian censorship of core political speech, under threat of incarceration, in a clear attempt to silence President Trump's arguments to the American people about the outrageous nature of this investigation and prosecution," defense lawyers said in a June filing.
The gag order hearing followed acontinuation Monday morningof Friday's hearing in which defense attorneys are seeking to have the documents case dismissed on the grounds that Smith was unlawfully appointed as special counsel.
Cannon will resume hearings on Tuesday -- first with a sealed hearing, followed by a public hearing on the use of evidence obtained from the search of Mar-a-Lago.
'False and extremely dangerous'
Trump's recent public statements related to the Mar-a-Lago search, during which agents found more than 100 documents with classified markings, have emphasized the use-of-force policy in place during the raid, which Trump has repeatedly associated with "Biden's DOJ."
Prosecutors argue that law enforcement employed the Department of Justice's standard use-of-force policy, which allows the use of force "when the officer has a reasonable belief that the subject of such force poses an imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to the officer or to another person."
In filings, Smith also emphasized that the search was scheduled in the off-season when Trump and his family were not present at Mar-a-Lago and that it was conducted with coordination with Secret Service and Mar-a-Lago staff -- and that Trump's lawyer was notified before the search was executed.
In a rare public rebuke, the FBIissued a statementlast month to confirm that law enforcement used standard protocols related to use of deadly force during the raid, adding that, "No one ordered additional steps to be taken and there was no departure from the norm in this matter."
Attorney General Merrick Garland also described accusations that the DOJ authorized Trump's assassination as "false and extremely dangerous" and added that the same policy was in place during the search ofPresident Biden's homeduring the investigation into his retention of classified documents.
Threats against law enforcement
Prosecutors have emphasized that the proposed gag order against Trump would be narrowly limited -- solely prohibiting Trump from falsely speaking about "FBI agents intending to murder him and his family" -- in order to protect the safety of law enforcement officials.
To illustrate the threat against law enforcement officials, prosecutors claimed that Trump's rhetoric encouraged a supporter to makethreats to an FBI agentassociated with the Hunter Biden case, including threatening that supporters would "hunt you down" and "slaughter you" if Trump does not win the 2024 election.
Prosecutors also argued that a Trump supporterattacked an FBI field officein Cincinnati with an AR-15 and a nail gun in August 2022 after the raid on Mar-a-Lago -- an attack which prosecutors say was partially inflamed by Trump's comments on social media after the raid.
Defense lawyers wrote that Trump has engaged in his "constitutionally protected campaign speech" and that prosecutors have failed to prove that Trump's statements have directly resulted in threats or harassment.
In addition to highlighting two examples of threats or violence, prosecutors broadly argued that Trump's inflammatory language about the raid has created a "combustible atmosphere" that poses an immediate risk to law enforcement.
"No court would tolerate another defendant deliberately creating such immediate risks to the safety of law enforcement, and this Court should not wait for a tragic event before taking action in this case," prosecutors said in a filing last week.
Trump's other gag orders
Trump has generally been unsuccessful in challenging the gag orders imposed in his other criminal and civil cases, occasionally securing stays of the orders but failing to overturn the orders as unconstitutional.
New York's highest courtdeclined to take upTrump's challenge to the gag order in Trump's civil fraud case, which prohibited Trump from making comments about judicial staff.
Last week, the same courtdeclined to immediately considerTrump's challenge to the gag order in his New York hush money case -- which prohibits Trump from making statements about jurors, witnesses, and others involved in the case -- after determining that "no substantial constitutional question is directly involved" in Trump's challenge. A mid-level appeals court last month found that the gag order "properly weighed petitioner's First Amendment Rights against the court's historical commitment to ensuring the fair administration of justice."
Trump also unsuccessfully challenged the gag order in his federal election interference case that prohibited from making statements about prosecutors other than Smith, witnesses, and courthouse staff.
"Given the record in this case, the court had a duty to act proactively to prevent the creation of an atmosphere of fear or intimidation aimed at preventing trial participants and staff from performing their functions within the trial process," a panel of Court of Appeals judges in Washington, D.C., wrote in an order last year upholding the gag order.
