The latest federal indictment of former President Donald Trump poses an unprecedented test of the Justice Department’s ability to build a persuasive case not just for 12 jurors but also for the history books. In seeking to do that, prosecutors will face a number of hurdles in court, including showing that Trump’s actions were criminal as opposed to protected free speech. On the issue of whether it can persuade the public of the righteousness of its prosecution, the Justice Department has taken on a huge and politically polarizing target in an atmosphere already ripe with mistrust over its motivations.
On Tuesday, special counsel Jack Smith brought criminal charges alleging that Trump sought to subvert the will of U.S. voters by trying to cling to power after his 2020 election loss—a foray into untraveled legal terrain that centers on the effective operation of America’s democracy. The indictment follows separate June charges that Trump retained classified documents and tried to obstruct their recovery, the first-ever federal criminal case against a former president.
How members of the public view Smith’s efforts would appear to depend largely on how they view Trump and whether they believe his false claims of victory in 2020. To Democrats and some Republicans, the new case is a test of the government’s ability to protect the integrity of the vote and to hold to account those whose election-result denials stoked tensions that led to the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S.
Read more on livemint.com