For the Federal Government to actually indict and ex-President is something that has NOT happened…
One KNOWS that Donald Trump HAS some illegal acts around and about the 2020 Presidental election andn its outcome…
But?
The Law is tricky….
Even if someone breaks the law?
In this case?
You would have to prove it in a historical , media entertaining case against a guy with high priced lawyers (maybe) and resources …A guy who WOULD use every trick in the book and political slugging to win and try get back in office again…
And THAT could make Donald J. Trump thge first America King who try to never leave office….
Now this is NOT to say Trump facing down Garland will set him home free….
(There are other Fedral cases with Trump’s name in them also)
My feeling is that Trump has more to worry about from state prosecutors ….
Particularly New York State’s Attorney General and Manhattan DA investigation’s…
They are more mundane ….
But rely on things that are straight forward….
The DA and Attorney Genral have been winning against Trump’s lawyers for a while…
Conviction’s with these two would cost Trump money owed to the state and possibly Federal government….
And COULD turn into crimnal cases….
In a prior post I have pointed out that Trump and his lawyers are on the hook for more than a half daozen case’s in New York, Wash. DC and Georgia …
Garland gets the most media attention…
But one would think the other cases just could cause him more worries and liabilities…
Thanks to the hearings, we now know more clearly that Trump tried to bully Vice President Mike Pence into blocking Congress’ count of electoral votes, tried to bully Justice Department officials into declaring the election fraudulent even though they knew it wasn’t and stood by with seeming approval while his armed supporters sacked the Capitol.
All of which has led many ordinary citizens — and not just Trump-haters — to wonder: Why isn’t Atty. Gen. Merrick Garland prosecuting this man?
The answer is both complicated and simple. Indicting a former president for trying to subvert a presidential election is harder than it looks.
“It’s definitely not a slam-dunk,” Paul Rosenzweig, a former federal prosecutor (and anti-Trump Republican), told me last week. “It will require tough decisions.”
The problem isn’t lack of evidence. The former Trump aides who have testified before the House committee and been interviewed by the FBI have taken care of that.
The problem, Rosenzweig and other former prosecutors said, is that convincing a jury that Trump is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt will still be difficult — especially when the former president, armed with good lawyers, can challenge that evidence.
“We know from the polls that about 30% of the American people think Trump did nothing wrong on Jan. 6,” Rosenzweig said. “Thirty percent of a jury is three or four people. I think getting a unanimous conviction will be nearly impossible, even in the liberal District of Columbia.”
And a trial that ends in Trump’s acquittal, he warned, would backfire….