11 Comments
⭠ Return to thread

Re Trump's lawyers creative arguments, Elie Honig said yesterday that the lawyers' motion to dismiss Smith’s federal election interference indictment on the basis of presidential immunity contains "merit and nuance. At a minimum, it raises thorny issues that will require courts to break new ground. And, while I wouldn’t quite say it’s more likely than not that Trump wins, he’s got a realistic, material chance of success. If he does prevail here, DOJ’s 2020 election fraud case is toast, and Fani Willis’s likely will be, too."

I found this persuasive. My thought was THIS is why Todd Blanche, a former AUSA in the Southern District of NY who Preet Bharara considers smart and competent, left his law firm to represent Trump. To argue this very thing.

Your thoughts?

Expand full comment

If Honig actually said that, it’s probably the smartest thing he’s ever said; the whole thing seems like it’s just an extremely expensive exercise…because, going back to before Trump was even [elected]—everything [they] said we should fear a President Trump might provide had already been accomplished, and under Democratic leadership, in none other than Rod Rosenstein and Robert Hur’s district

Expand full comment
Error