The legal landscape surrounding former President Donald Trump’s potential return to the White House is experiencing a significant shift, with what once appeared insurmountable legal barriers now resembling mere speed bumps. Prosecutors across various jurisdictions, from Georgia to Florida to Washington, D.C., are encountering challenges in bringing criminal charges against Trump to trial, highlighting the complexities of prosecuting a former president, Politico reported this week.
But that doesn’t mean that people like Steve Bannon are dropping the push for investigations into the weaponization of government and a vast criminal conspirarcy- in fact- the crumbling of these cases could prove election interference against Trump.
Bannon continues to call for action from the US House- watch:
BANNON: TIME TO START CALLING BLUFFS
"Netanyahu call Biden’s bluff.”
"President Trump call the Judge’s bluff.”
"Matt Gaetz & republicans—call these republicans that you think are going to Hakeem Jeffries side—I don’t believe it, call their bluff.” pic.twitter.com/cFOBpZ3MVF
— Grace Chong 🇺🇸 (@gc22gc) May 9, 2024
Despite the initial enthusiasm by Trump’s opponents surrounding the announcement of criminal cases against Trump, including charges related to election interference, obstruction of justice, and conspiracy, the path to trial has been fraught with delays and postponements. As Trump faces ongoing legal battles, including the hush money case in Manhattan, the likelihood of him standing trial before the 2024 election diminishes.
The postponement of trials in Florida and Georgia and the Supreme Court’s intervention in the Washington case have further stalled the legal proceedings against Trump. While some hope for a wide-ranging evidentiary hearing to publicly air Trump’s alleged misdeeds, the prospect of such a hearing shaping the political landscape remains uncertain.
Despite frustrations with the pace of legal action, the potential impact of these trials on Trump’s presidential prospects remains unclear. While they may generate new insights into Trump’s actions leading up to January 6, 2021, and divert attention from his campaign efforts, the ultimate political ramifications are yet to be determined.
As the trials against Trump unfold, the WarRoom audience, guests, and contributors continue to raise concerns about the legitimacy of the charges and are still focused on the potential impact of new document revelations, especially as reported by investigative reporter Julie Kelly.
In a recent conversation between Kelly and commentator Jack Posobiec, key insights were shared regarding the vague nature of the accusations that Trump faces and the drastic implications for future presidential accountability.
While talking to Posobiec, Kelly went into the heart of the matter, highlighting the lack of specificity in the charges brought against Trump.
She emphasized:
“These are not specific crimes that Donald Trump is charged with in Washington. For January 6. We’re talking about three vague conspiracy charges and one obstruction count.”
Kelly told Posobiec that the charges against Trump were based on broad, ambiguous allegations.
Kelly talked about the potential repercussions of such broad charges, warning:
“If we apply these big statutes with this really broad language, this conduct can be used in anything, going forward with the president.”
Kelly addressed broader concerns about the erosion of legal standards and the risk of setting a dangerous precedent for future presidential accountability.
Posobiec and Kelly agreed, and each expressed skepticism about the legitimacy of specific individuals involved in the legal proceedings.
Kelly added more details about the importance of Judge Cannon’s efforts in the Florida case against Trump, which could further undermine the case.
“Judge Cannon is doing her part in Florida… exposing the likelihood that Jackson should not be doing what he’s doing because he has no authority to do so,” Kelly told Posobiec.
Kelly has tirelessly covered the challenges facing the prosecution in numerous cases. As new documents come to light, including nonpublic defense motions filed by Trump related to the Mar-a-Lago raid and prosecutorial abuse motions, the credibility of the case against Trump continues to be called into question.
Kelly pointed out that the Supreme Court’s upcoming decision on presidential immunity could significantly impact the trajectory of numerous cases.
Kelly and Posobiec discussed how this decision could further weaken the prosecution’s case against Trump, adding another layer of complexity to an already contentious legal battle.
WATCH:
SCOTUS Could Have Big Impact on Jack Smith’s Cases
Journalist @julie_kelly2 and @JackPosobiec discuss how the Supreme Court’s upcoming decision on presidential immunity is yet another way that Jack Smith’s cases against President Trump could fall apart.
Watch LIVE➡… pic.twitter.com/O0p6eWnO7Y
— Real America's Voice (RAV) (@RealAmVoice) May 9, 2024
Critical Kelly post:
NEW: Judge Cannon preparing to unseal nonpublic defense motions filed by Trump related to Mar a Lago raid, DC Judge Beryl Howell order that pierced atty-client privilege in docs case, and a prosecutorial abuse motion.
Keeps getting good… pic.twitter.com/7RrNIagnWe
— Julie Kelly 🇺🇸 (@julie_kelly2) May 9, 2024
