There are some redactions, I understand, but most of it is now public. I’m still digesting this, but here are some links.
New York Times, Judge Unseals New Evidence in Federal Election Case Against Trump
Talking Points Memo, UNSEALED: Jack Smith Details Why Trump Isn’t Immune From Prosecution For Jan. 6 Crimes
CBS News, Key takeaways from special counsel Jack Smith’s major filing in Trump’s 2020 election case
MSNBC, Read Jack Smith’s unsealed redacted motion on Trump presidential immunity
I’m sure there will be more commentary tomorrow.
I've read 110 pages. Most of it is stuff we political junkies know, but we learned it in drips and dribbles. Jack Smith, in the first half of the document lays out in chronological order how the scheme evolved from BEFORE the election until J6 and a bit after. The only name not redacted was Mike Pence.
The second half reviews incidents reounted in the first half, in order, from a legal standpoint. All the relevant precedents are cited, including the USSC decision which prompted Smith to rewrite the indictment.
I'd bet a lot that Jack Smith has the receipts for everything. That's going to be argued on the tenth, how much of the evidence should be redacted. Jack Smith has made his proposal – Trump has to reply by the tenth.
The cat is out of the bag. The indictment listed the crimes – this document tells the story of how Trump conspired to try to steal the election. Relative to the election, Harris can't mention it because it would be prejudicial. But anybody else CAN talk about what's there, and hopefully, how Trump is running from jail, not for president.
BTW, Trump has had all this stuff for a year or longer. Discovery. Trump will still try to delay the process to keep the evidence out of the public eye. He did a hell of a job – here we are just over a month out of the election and this stuff is just being released as part of the criminal justice system.