Staff Reports
Legal scholar Jonathan Turley raises the pertinent question that many are contemplating in light of the seven-count indictment issued against former President Donald Trump by a grand jury. The inquiry at its heart is, what was Trump thinking? This indictment potentially paves the way for a perilous precedent, as Trump is the inaugural former president to confront federal criminal charges. Though Trump has vehemently professed his innocence, Turley observes that his words fall upon a polarized audience that has largely cemented their views, indifferent to the nuances. It’s essentially a binary choice: belief in Trump’s guilt or seeing him as a target of political persecution, with no scope for a middle ground.
'What Was in the Mind of Donald Trump?' Jonathan Turley Says Indictment Case Comes Down to Single Issue https://t.co/Ra0ZmTpe0h
— RedState (@RedState) June 9, 2023
Turley articulates that the indictment originating from New York is a perfect fit for Trump’s narrative of the criminal justice system being wielded as a political weapon. Turley cautions about the metaphorical torpedo that now poses a severe threat, a torpedo that has found its mark. While Trump insists that all classified documents at Mar-a-Lago were returned to the National Archives, some remain unaccounted for and are still in his custody. The FBI subsequently obtained permission to access a storage room at Mar-a-Lago for these documents, and his staff members maintain that they had been actively cooperating even before the FBI’s unexpected intervention. Turley points out that the allegations of “obstructive” conduct were swiftly identified as alarming by those familiar with such matters.
The task falls upon us to determine if Trump knowingly breached specific regulations, warranting criminal charges, especially concerning his intention or mens rea. While some remaining details could undermine this line of defense, charges related to making false statements and obstruction of justice, favorites among federal prosecutors, are centered around Trump’s response to the investigation. Such charges, typically straightforward for a jury, are generally dreaded by criminal defense attorneys due to the history of successful prosecutions.
Trump now finds himself in a precarious position, having to navigate two significant hurdles. First, succeeding on claims of selective prosecution is notoriously difficult. Secondly, the charges are focused on his response to the investigation, where the false statements charge could prove especially damning, as it stands as a solitary offense. If proven that Trump falsified or distorted a fact while conversing with the FBI, a rightful conviction could be in the offing. However, the challenges we face extend beyond this recent indictment. The Department of Justice, under the administration of Joe Biden and Attorney General Merrick Garland, must answer for any corruption, regardless of the outcome of this case. Join our cause and register as a RedState VIP member today!
