Åtal mot Donald Trump i Georgia, angående försök till påverkan av valresultatet (2023-08-14)

Here we go again: another disastrous Trump indictment. It’s downright pathetic that Fulton County publicly posted the indictment on its website even before the grand jury had finished convening. Since the four prosecutions against Trump are using novel & untested legal theories, it’s fair game for him to do the same in defense: immediately file a motion to dismiss for a constitutional due process violation for publicly issuing an indictment before the grand jury had actually signed one. He should make a strong argument on these grounds & it would send a powerful message to the ever-expansive prosecutorial police state. As someone who’s running for President against Trump, I’d volunteer to write the amicus brief to the court myself: prosecutors should not be deciding U.S. presidential elections, and if they’re so overzealous that they commit constitutional violations, then the cases should be thrown out & they should be held accountable.

Fani Willis just indicted a bunch of lawyers for doing legal work

Real banana republic stuff

First of all, nobody should take seriously that there was grand jury indictment. The fact that it was a grand jury indictment, it means nothing. It's the prosecutor who indicted. The best evidence of that is that it was on his website before the grand jury even voted. Now, the whole strategy of all these four cases is to get a conviction before the election, even if they're going to lose on appeal.
I used to teach my students, many of them future prosecutors, if you bring a Rico case, that increases your chances of winning a trial and losing on appeal. The same thing is true with conspiracy and other cases involving mental states. And so all four of these cases are designed to get quick convictions in jurisdictions that are heavily loaded against Donald Trump.
And these prosecutors don't care as much as prosecutors generally do about having the convictions reversed on appeal, because that will happen after the election, which only goes to prove what I've been arguing now for months. If you're going after the man who's runningagainst your incumbent president, you had darn well better have the strongest case possible. And these are among the four, at least three of them, three weakest cases I’ve ever seen against any candidate. We don't know about the fourth, but it seems like it's very much like the DC case.
And if you're going after the man running for president against your person, you have to have the strongest case. Otherwise, it becomes a banana republic. Anybody can prosecute anybody.And we're opening the door to prosecutionof Democrats by Republicans, Republicans by Democrats. It's what Alexander Hamilton wrote in The Federalist isthe most dangerous threat to democracy, and we're seeingit unfold in front of our eyes.Very, very tragically.

I'm not a Republican, I'm not a Trump supporter, but I care deeply about the Constitution.I care deeply about preserving the rule of law. And we're seeing it being fritter away for partisan political purposes.