Trump’s Private Messages Obtained by Special Counsel

Gage Skidmore from Peoria, AZ, United States of America, CC BY-SA 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

( – Investigator Jack Smith aimed to scrutinize ex-President Trump’s private messages, unfinished tweets, and location data while probing matters related to his profile on X, previously recognized as Twitter.

Recent public court files shed light on the data that the prosecution was after when they issued a subpoena for records linked to the Twitter account in January, a move that was greenlit by the judiciary.

These specifics are derived from hearings in February overseen by former U.S. District Court Head Judge Beryl Howell. The judge consistently inquired if the reluctance of the platform indicated an intention by the recently-appointed CEO Elon Musk to build a closer relationship with Trump.

A considerable part of Twitter’s reluctance in sharing the details stemmed from the Justice Department’s wish to keep the request hidden from Trump, resulting in an initial non-compliance with the judicial directive to release the documents, leading to a $350,000 penalty.

Yet, in the disclosed dialogue, there were apprehensions from Twitter’s side that some of Trump’s messages might be protected by executive privilege, particularly if they discussed state affairs with fellow officials.

The papers reveal the breadth of information Smith was pursuing, inclusive of data on any tweets that were formulated or prepared but later discarded, as well as all related account searches.

Notably, a substantial amount of data that was requested does not seem to be mentioned in the recently issued four-count indictment by a grand jury, which primarily refers to Trump’s publicly shared tweets.

There were debates between the involved parties about the depth of evidence the prosecutors presented to support their plea for an account access warrant. Twitter’s stance was that there was no necessity to keep Trump in the dark about the search due to the publicly known investigative details.

During a discussion with legal representatives from both DOJ and the platform, Howell remarked, “You’re not even fully aware of the exact warrant you’re here to postpone.”

The records also underline the prosecution’s exasperation over Twitter’s reluctance to share the requested data, with DOJ lawyer Thomas Windom expressing his discontent about preliminary discussions prior to the court appearance.

Twitter later challenged Judge Howell’s decision, but an appellate court affirmed her stance, agreeing that revealing the search details to Trump was not in the best interest of the investigation.

The appellate court ruling highlighted, “There were justifiable reasons to presume that informing ex-President Trump about the warrant would potentially endanger the ongoing probe.”

Trump, however, publicly criticized the examination of his Twitter profile, denouncing the prosecutors for unauthorized access, even though they had legally secured a search warrant.

On Truth Social, Trump vented, “Outrageous that prosecutor Jack Smith accessed my Twitter without my knowledge and even tried to keep this misconduct concealed. What more could he uncover that’s not already public?”

Copyright 2023,