Trump indictment brings him closer to the danger zone

Any legal case brought against a former US President will inevitably have both political and legal considerations. Cases that are legally correct may have little impact politically; A prosecution that may be politically explosive may fail in a court of law. It has been Donald Trump’s good fortune so far that none of his countless scandals have been legally indisputable and politically compelling.

Neither was the April indictment brought by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg. Those charges — sparked by hush money payments made by Trump to one-time porn actress Stormy Daniels — relied on sleight of hand legal dexterity to turn them into felonies, and allegedly contained 34 counts of “false business records.” Not exactly the stuff of political attack ads.

The next two cases the former president may face veer closer to danger territory, but are in some ways mirror images of each other. Looks like a legal slam dunk but has questionable political implications; The other has all the theatrics of a melodrama made for Hollywood, but may be unplayable in front of a jury.

The impeachment to be dropped on Trump on Tuesday proves to be the easiest to prove. Allegations that the former president knowingly absconded with classified intelligence and then knowingly conspired to possess it despite a court order has all the elements a prosecutor could want — evidence in desk drawers and basement storage rooms ; the possibility of co-conspirators testifying to the conspiracy; Even audio tapes of Trump admitting guilt.

Those who know Jack Smith, the special prosecutor who brought the new charges, say he has a reputation for only filing winning cases — a sign of his extreme confidence in the legal hand he’s about to play. Is.

But do pieces of paper placed in cardboard boxes have the ability to break through political noise? It has long been the worst-kept secret in Washington that the US capital is plagued by over-classification. Nearly every intelligence officer or military official with a security clearance is stamped “Top Secret,” even on the most innocuous documents.

Furthermore, the political waters have been muddied by the fact that both Joe Biden and Mike Pence stored classified documents in their personal offices after leaving the vice presidency. Unlike Trump, both did it by mistake and turned it back on as soon as they learned of their crimes. But in the conspiracy-filled world of modern American politics, such distinctions are almost always lost in translation.

In contrast, the impeachment expected to come out of Georgia this summer is increasingly looking like the stuff of political thrillers. Audio recordings of Trump attempting to move the state from Biden’s column by tallying thousands of non-existent votes in a phone call to Georgia’s top election officials have already been made public. It would seem that there would be no greater crime politically than an open attempt to subvert the will of the American people.

But can Fulton County Attorney-General Fannie Willis really sustain the charges? The hardest hurdle to clear, legal analysts have argued, is proving intent – ​​if Trump truly believes he won in Georgia, were his efforts intended to break the law? It is much easier to prove in the court of public opinion than in the court of reality.

However, at this point, individual indictments may mean less than the direction of travel. We are moving from allegations that are largely on the periphery of Trumpian misdeeds to something far more consequential and damaging. The cumulative effect of the indictments will begin to weigh on Trump legally and politically, draining the former president of time and resources. He remains the Republican frontrunner for the 2024 nomination. But he is entering a summer in which prosecutors, judges and juries can begin to determine whether he can stay there.

peter.spiegel@ft.com