Many legal analysts say former President Donald Trump may have an easier time prevailing in court and in the court of public opinion in the case against him in Manhattan; however, the case pending in Georgia could be more legally challenging.
Donald Trump Heads to Court
Then there is the Georgia situation. The former president made a phone call to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger during which the then-president said, “I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have.”
Trump allegedly claimed that Raffensperger and Ryan Germany, the chief lawyer in the secretary of State’s office, could be criminally prosecuted if they didn’t do his bidding.
“You know what they did and you’re not reporting it,” Trump said during the call. “You know, that’s a criminal — that’s a criminal offense. And you know, you can’t let that happen. That’s a big risk to you and to Ryan, your lawyer. That’s a big risk.”
The Georgia grand jury in Fulton County continues to examine whether Trump violated the state’s laws against criminal solicitation to commit election fraud, making false statements to state and local government bodies, and the involvement of violence or threats related to election administration and racketeering. In a worst-case scenario, Trump could face prosecution under the state’s RICO law.
Troubles in Georgia, a Weak Case in New York City?
DeKalb County, Ga., District Attorney Robert James told 11 Alive news that convicting Trump in Georgia could prove easier than with the case in New York over the $130,000 payment to Stephanie Clifford, aka Stormy Daniels. Even the former president’s staunchest opponents such as former Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe admit the case is very weak.
“If you polled the general public, it’s not the kind of thing that people are going to be upset about and is going to be the topic of Sunday dinner,” James said. “However, the case in Georgia, the case in Atlanta, involves the former president allegedly calling everyone he could find in Georgia, including secretary of state, and asking them to go find votes.”
James continued: “And that undermines our democracy. And that is something that affects everyone. And I’d much rather have that case because it’s easier to sell to a jury and easier to make them care.”
He noted that getting an indictment is easy. Having the charges in a case like this stick is a different story.
Trump’s attorneys made a motion last month seeking to quash evidence against their client in the Georgia grand jury report as “unconstitutional.”
“… [T]he foreperson’s and grand jurors’ comments illuminate the lack of proper instruction and supervision over the grand jury relating to clear evidentiary matters which violates the notions of fundamental fairness and due process. The results of the investigation cannot be relied upon and, therefore, must be suppressed given the constitutional violations. The foreperson’s public comments in and of themselves likewise violate notions of fundamental fairness and due process and taint any future grand jury pool,” the motion stated.
Grand jury forewoman Emily Kohrs told CNN in February that a list of indictments against the former president was possible.
“Can you imagine doing this for eight months and not coming out with a whole list” of indictments, Kohrs told CNN. “It’s not a short list. It’s not. There may be some names on that list that you wouldn’t expect. But the big name that everyone keeps asking me about ― I don’t think you will be shocked.”
Emory University Political Science Professor Andrea Gillespie told 11 Alive News that Trump’s attorneys would have the opportunity to chip away at the accusations if an indictment comes.
MORE: Is AOC a Sellout?
“These lawyers are going to have to make their case and they’re going to have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that President Trump did the things that they are accusing him of doing. So in that respect, the due process matters here. And he’s going to get access to due process. He’s not going to be denied those rights to have his day in court,” Gillespie said.
John Rossomando was a senior analyst for Defense Policy and served as Senior Analyst for Counterterrorism at The Investigative Project on Terrorism for eight years. His work has been featured in numerous publications such as The American Thinker, Daily Wire, Red Alert Politics, CNSNews.com, The Daily Caller, Human Events, Newsmax, The American Spectator, TownHall.com, and Crisis Magazine. He also served as senior managing editor of The Bulletin, a 100,000-circulation daily newspaper in Philadelphia, and received the Pennsylvania Associated Press Managing Editors first-place award in 2008 for his reporting.