Washington DC grand jury that indicted Trump meets again in sign Jack Smith’s probe isn’t over

Mr Smith said his investigation would continue and focus on ‘other individuals’

The federal grand jury in Washington DC that indicted former president Donald Trump last week met again on Tuesday, suggesting special counsel Jack Smith's criminal investigation is still underway.

Multiple members of the grand jury were reportedly seen around the E Barrett Prettyman Courthouse in Washington DC, according to NBC News.

The same grand jury indicted Mr Trump on 1 August with four felony counts related to his attempt to overturn the 2020 presidential election results.

Six co-conspirators, mostly lawyers, were mentioned in the indictment, though none were named.

Some or all of them may face charges, which could explain why the grand jury is continuing to meet following Mr Trump's indictment.

Mr Smith noted last week that his "investigation of other individuals continues."

An attorney representing John Eastman, an ally of Mr Trump, confirmed that he was likely the second co-conspirator discussed in the indictment, CNBC reports.

Anticipating possible indictment, Mr Eastman's attorneys have asked a California judge to postpone his pending disbarment as the same conduct may result in charges from the grand jury.

The state moved to disbar Mr Eastman over his role organising a strategy to steal the 2020 election victory from Joe Biden by convincing then-vice president Mike Pence to reject certifying state election results.

Mr Trump’s former attorney Rudy Giuliani may be one of the other co-conspirators mentioned in the indictment.

Election 2024 Democracy (Copyright 2023 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.)

Former New Your City Police Department commissioner Bernie Kerik reportedly met for hours with Mr Smith's investigators in Washington DC. His lawyer said the interview centred on Mr Giuliani's role in the 2020 election theft scheme. Mr Kerik worked with Mr Giuliani on the effort to overturn the election.

In addition to the continued investigation, Mr Smith has also requested a judge to limit the evidence that Mr Trump can share publicly regarding the 2020 election. He said he was prepared to hand over a "substantial" amount of evidence to Mr Trump's defence attorneys, but wanted some of the information protected from improper disclosure. That information includes details about witnesses and their attorneys, who could face substantial threat and harassment if Mr Trump makes them a target.

He cited a recent post Mr Trump made on Truth Social to highlight his concerns.

"IF YOU GO AFTER ME, I'M COMING AFTER YOU!" Mr Trump wrote on his social media platform.

"If the defendant were to begin issuing public posts using details — or, for example, grand jury transcripts — obtained in discovery here, it could have a harmful chilling effect on witnesses or adversely affect the fair administration of justice in this case," Mr Smith argued in his request.

Mr Trump's attorneys have pushed back against the request, arguing that it would limit the former president's freedom of speech.