Constitutional law scholar Jonathan Turley believes Special Counsel Jack Smith requires substantial and unambiguous evidence to indict former President Trump in the ongoing January 6th grand jury investigation. Speaking on "America's Newsroom," Turley suggested the target letter sent to Trump by the Department of Justice likely foreshadows an impending indictment. However, he maintained that the former president's speech at the Ellipse is constitutionally protected political expression. Turley emphasized the need for compelling evidence that goes beyond the speech itself, asserting that Smith must demonstrate actions beyond protected political discourse to justify an indictment against a former president. He cautioned against overextending the criminal code, drawing parallels to the case against Trump brought by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg. Turley referenced the Brandenburg legal precedent, which safeguards political speech under the First Amendment, highlighting the high bar required to prosecute Trump based on his remarks. He argued that if the indictment relies primarily on the speech, it would risk appearing politically motivated. Trump confirmed receiving the target letter via a Truth Social post, anticipating an arrest and indictment. A source within the government corroborated the issuance of the target letter by Smith's office. In his post, Trump criticized Special Counsel Jack Smith, characterizing him as "deranged" and alleging that the timing of the letter (Sunday night) and the short four-day timeframe to appear before the grand jury suggest a predetermined outcome.