In the aftermath of a 37-count indictment being released by the Department of Justice, right leaning and conservative legal scholars are divided on what the details mean for former President Donald Trump.
First, there's the side that believes the indictment lacks standing or will go nowhere. Former Supreme Court clerk Mike Davis has taken this approach.
“This is clearly election interference by Joe Biden…Isn't it funny that the day that Joe Biden gets caught taking $10 million from Burisma, Biden's Attorney General Merrick Garland green lights this indictment of his leading presidential rival?” - @mrddmia to @JesseBWatters pic.twitter.com/x9KK5aZ3AI
— The Article III Project (A3P) (@Article3Project) June 12, 2023
People may disagree with the Obama judge’s 2012 ruling on “personal” versus “presidential” for Clinton’s 8 years of highly classified audio recordings in his sock drawer.
— 🇺🇸 Mike Davis 🇺🇸 (@mrddmia) June 12, 2023
But no one can dispute the Presidential Records Act allows former presidents to have their presidential… https://t.co/e94fuCEFSp
Overall, good piece.
— 🇺🇸 Mike Davis 🇺🇸 (@mrddmia) June 12, 2023
But it misses this crucial distinction:
Former Presidents are allowed to have their presidential records.
Including classified.
That’s allowed by the Presidential Records Act.
That’s why Congress gives former presidents the Office of the Former…
Constitutional scholar Mark Levin concurs and is highlighting an unequal application of the law.
Here's the damnable truth, and everyone knows it. If every former president and numerous cabinet members were subjected to an Espionage Act investigation focused on their handling and retention of classified information, we'd have to set up a small penal colony for former…
— Mark R. Levin (@marklevinshow) June 10, 2023
Importantly, the Presidential Records Act has NO criminal penalty because the Congress and Carter had no intention of criminalizing document retention matters. And never before has the 1917 Espionage Act was never even discussed as applying to a former president. There is no…
— Mark R. Levin (@marklevinshow) June 9, 2023
Then, there's others who are warning Trump's future is grim.
Over the weekend former Attorney General Bill Barr said Trump was "toast" after reading the details of the indictment.
Trump's former Attorney General Bill Barr:
— The Recount (@therecount) June 11, 2023
"I think the counts under the Espionage Act ... are solid counts ... If even half of it is true, then he's toast. It's a very detailed indictment, and it's very, very damning." pic.twitter.com/DleBOaPw4f
George Washington University Law Professor Jonathan Turley has a similar analysis, warning the charges are the "darlings of prosecutors."
TRUMP'S INDICTMENT FOR MISHANDLING CLASSIFIED DOCS 'A DIFFERENT BALL GAME' THAN BRAGG PROSECUTION.@JonathanTurley: "The Alvin Bragg prosecution is a political prosecution, it is what Trump says it is, it is a weaponization of the criminal justice system, in my view. This is a… pic.twitter.com/5eN7XzAceg
— America's Newsroom (@AmericaNewsroom) June 9, 2023
Trump will be arraigned in a Miami federal court Tuesday afternoon and is vowing to fight all 37-counts in the indictment.
NEW: @Julio_Rosas11 talks to Trump supporters who've started to assemble at the courthouse where police continue to ramp up security, Antifa is set to arrive, Vivek Ramaswamy holds a press conference, and the bomb squad checks out a TV.https://t.co/6fwZZ1KXzg
— Spencer Brown (@itsSpencerBrown) June 13, 2023