Altitude 40000 (T.me) just skimmed the latest indictment.
Firstly, its scope is enormous. It makes sweeping assertions regarding the election, its validity, etc., that appear to open the door to Trump re-litigating the entire thing, from top to bottom. This, of course, will depend entirely on what arguments and evidence the judge will allow into the process, but given that the indictment rests on such a broad foundation, if the judge is arbitrary or prejudicial in terms of the scope of Trump's defence, it creates vulnerability to appeal.
I find, to repeat myself, the scope to be boggling. I have no idea how the court will manage this process, nor how the prosecution imagined it all, but stepping through the elements of the case, deciding on discovery and evidence (which would involve multiple other jurisdictions and thus likely a bunch of seperate fights, perhaps in other courts), identifying witnesses and giving them time to lawyer up, and so on, would take YEARS to do properly.
Of course, there may be little intention of properly handling the case on the part of the prosecution, The judge, however, may not wish to have her reputation and career reduced to ridicule by presiding over a partisan kangaroo court. She was appointed to the Federal bench in the Obama era, but her background before and performance since has been that of a serious lawyer and jurist. I have little doubt that she is something of a partisan, but I have my doubts that she'd happily trash her career, especially if it is very likely that any hack-ish work on her part would be destroyed upon appeal.
Others have already opined about the poor quality of the indictment. I am no lawyer and cannot comment authoritatively here, but it is not beyond the pale to imagine that the whole thing ends up getting tossed after being used temporarily as fodder for election interference. But if this does get tossed, it opens the door to asking how such poor quality indictments could be allowed to be brought against Trump in the lead-up to 2024. If the Biden administration and the deep state are in a terminal stage of panic, this may not be a factor in their thinking, but I cannot escape the suspicion that this case will end up being used to bury rather than save those who have brought these charges forward.
As I said, I am no lawyer, but I do know that proving criminal intent is necessary. Unless the prosecutor has a smoking gun, a credible witness, etc., to establish criminal intent, I suspect this will be extremely difficult to prove and Trump will have a lot of room to run in his won defence.
This looks like an act of desperation that has little prospect of practical success. But the swamp has lots of power and influence and a surprisingly compliant judge could turn this into a damaging case for Trump. But I doubt it.
It occurs to me that there could be some tactical surprises from Trump. The Arizona elections are a part of the prosecution’s case. Could we somehow see entanglements between Lake’s litigation and this latest indictment? If there are any judicial findings of fact, I’d expect to see such pop up in Trump’s defence.
Other elements include the credibility of CISA and other agencies. The defence could potentially have a field day there too.
Bottom line, this looks to me to be written with today’s headlines in mind and not much of substance beyond that.
https://t.me/Altitude40000/21732