Harvard Poll: 55 Percent of the Public View the Trump Indictment as “Politically Motivated”

A Harvard/Harris poll is bad news for Attorney General Merrick Garland and the Justice Department. The poll shows that 55% of Americans believe Trump’s indictment is politically motivated and 56%  believe that it constitutes election interference.  The poll captures the level of distrust for the Justice Department and further demonstrates what I described yesterday as the failure of Merrick Garland at the midpoint of his tenure as Attorney General.

The view of the case appears to be worsening. Now there is less than a majority viewing the indictment as well-founded and justified. The poll shows that 83% of Republicans and 55% of Independents view the indictment as a political exercise. Not only do 56 percent view it as election interference but only 44 percent see it as “the fair application of the law”: 

The poll is also bad news for Biden. Some 65 percent believe Biden “mishandled” classified material while 72 percent take that view with Clinton’s email scandal.

The Justice Department and the media appear to have “lost the room” with the American people. They are primarily appealing to Democrats who (at 80%) support the indictment.

The FBI and the Justice Department made this perception worse through continual leaks to the media and allegedly staging the photo above after the raid on Mar-a-Lago.

By his own measure, Garland has failed to restore the credibility and trust in the Justice Department. It now appears worse than when his predecessor, Bill Barr, was in office.

It is also an indictment of the media. After years of “advocacy journalism” and biased reporting, the public now tunes out the media. This is a strong indictment with troubling allegations and evidence. Yet, it does not matter because the media long ago lost much of the country with one-sided, unrelenting coverage.

It also means that this case could conceivably never see a jury unless Special Counsel Jack Smith succeeds in pushing for a speedy trial before the election. A majority of the public now supports a pardon for Trump if he is convicted.  With these polls, the pressure of other Republican candidates to pledge a pardon is likely to increase. Indeed, as suggested in another column, Biden may want to consider a pledge to commute any sentence to try to defang this building election issue.


159 thoughts on “Harvard Poll: 55 Percent of the Public View the Trump Indictment as “Politically Motivated””

  1. Jonathan: Polls are not the only thing that was happening this week. Trump’s attorneys are dropping like flies. Jim Trusty just resigned from Trump’s legal team citing “irreconcilable differences”. John Rowley, another lawyer representing Trump in the Mar-a-Lago case, is also gone. The only reason they are gone is Trump was upset they could not convince Jack Smith’s team to drop all the charges. So who is left to represent Trump? Chris Kise and Todd Blanche. The latter is a NY lawyer and not even authorized to appear in federal courts in Florida. Blanche also represents Trump in the Stormy Daniel’s hush money case.

    All this means the lawyers representing Trump in the various lawsuits are spread thin. Trump desperately needs to expand his legal team if he wants put on viable defenses against Jack Smith’s formable legal team. But all the really competent criminal defense firms in Florida won’t touch Trump with a ten foot pole. And for very good reasons. What happens when Fani Willis in Fulton County, Florida charges Trump with numerous crimes under Georgia law? Who will Trump call to represent him there?

    Trump is facing other problem in the Miami indictment. Supervising Judge Eileen Cannon, who herself lacks experience in trying complex criminal cases, has told Trump’s lawyers they must obtain security clearances to review all the top secret docs. Neither Kise nor Blanche have security clearances. All the prosecutors on Smith’s legal teams have security clearances.

    Then Trump faces problems in trying to campaign while trying to juggle all the prosecutions he faces. Trump raised $2 million after his arraignment in Miami but that won’t go far in paying all the attorneys he needs to defend him. What a dilemma. Trump needs money from the deep pocket donors he depended on in 2020–where he spent $2.74 billion and lost! It now appears conservative billionaire Charles Kock is going to take a pass. Koch’s “Americans for Prosperity” super-PAC just released ads targeted at voters in several key states. One ad is headed “Biden’s Secret Weapon”–that says “the only way Biden wins if if we nominate Trump again” and “Trump can’t win, we need new leadership”. A sign that Trump is going to find it difficult to raise big money from wealthy GOP donors this time around.

    But Trump has one thing going for him. Challenges in getting new attorneys up to speed, having to get security clearances, etc. means any trial in the Miami case may not take place until after the 2024 election. That’s Trump’s only hope!

  2. Does anyone believe that Trump didn’t violate Section 3 of the 14th Amendment with the January 6 coup attempt? If not why not?

    Section 3 was added following the Civil War and made crystal clear, that supreme loyalty of any American official – including presidents – is to uphold the U.S. Constitution.

    Giving aid & comfort to domestic enemies attempting a coup or insurrection is precisely what Section 3 was created for. This predates the classified documents case.

    1. “I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.”

      – Real President Donald J. Trump

      Obongo told his communists to “take a gun to a knife fight.”

      “Crazy Abe” unconstitutionally killed 1 million Americans for nothing – less of a rationale than Vietnam.

        1. Says Aninny who never, I repeat, never repeats himself.

          Wait! I represent that!

          I simply answered a question which was asked.

          You’re being excessive and boorish.

          Bad on you, you doofus Aninny!

          Oh, and thanks for reading…


  3. It is illegal for a cop to place a certain political candidate under criminal investigation because he doesn’t want that person to be elected to public office.

    1. Biden and Garland just did it. What are you trying to say, that Biden and Garland need to be arrested? They ARE the cops! What’s wrong with this picture? American courage, that’s what’s wrong with this picture. The actual American sheeple need to rapidly obtain prodigious quantities of courage – on the level of George Washington et al.

      “I began by telling [America] that there was a cancer growing on [America] and that if the cancer was not removed [America] [itself] would be killed by it.”

      – John Dean, Nixon White House Counsel, [2023]

      “I began by telling the president that there was a cancer growing on the presidency and that if the cancer was not removed that the President himself would be killed by it.”

      – John Dean, Nixon White House Counsel, 1973

      1. Cops commit crimes every day. It has always been that way. Arrest Biden, arrest Garland, arrest Smith.

        1. Some cities have police oversite committees made up of citizens. I think we need one of these at the federal level.

          1. Others with experience will weight in, but, Do the oversight committees have any power? Or can they only write a report?

            We must go back to power.

            All power originates with the People. In cities and counties, the police and the prosecutors are elected by the people. The derive their power from the people

            As the radical left has corrupted elections and gained power, places like San Francisco, have become the product of Democrat policies.
            rampant homelessness, decriminalization of drug use, driving the homelessness, and mental illness. That in turn driving rational people, and major corporations out of San Francisco.

          2. It’s like the Civil War when “Crazy Abe” stole power the Constitution did not provide him, and went crazy with that illicit power.

  4. “Harvard Poll: 55 Percent of the Public View the Trump Indictment as ‘Politically Motivated’”

    – Professor Turley


    “the people are nothing but a great beast…

    I have learned to hold popular opinion of no value.”

    – Alexander Hamilton


    “The true reason (says Blackstone) of requiring any qualification, with regard to property in voters, is to exclude such persons, as are in so mean a situation, that they are esteemed to have no will of their own.”

    “If it were probable that every man would give his vote freely, and without influence of any kind, then, upon the true theory and genuine principles of liberty, every member of the community, however poor, should have a vote… But since that can hardly be expected, in persons of indigent fortunes, or such as are under the immediate dominion of others, all popular states have been obliged to establish certain qualifications, whereby, some who are suspected to have no will of their own, are excluded from voting; in order to set other individuals, whose wills may be supposed independent, more thoroughly upon a level with each other.”

    – Alexander Hamilton, The Farmer Refuted, 1775

    The imperative is the clear and evident, meaning and intent of the Constitution, not public opinion or the vote.

    The singular, egregious and prodigious American failure has been and remains the judicial branch, with emphasis on the Supreme Court.

    People who are able to read English do not require “interpreters.”

    1. Article 2, Section 1

      The executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.

  5. This reads like a story that details how a fireman (Garland) failed to save a burning building while ignoring the evidence that the fireman (Garland) contributed to the fire.

    The Professor apparently reaffirms his assessment of 8/16/22:

    “Merrick Garland is a person with unimpeachable ethics and integrity.”

  6. Professor Turley: “Biden may want to consider a pledge to commute any sentence to try to defang this building election issue.”

    I suspected that that was Joe’s strategy all along, to pardon Trump so that he could pardon Hunter, too. I’m beginning to doubt that.

    It looks like Joe intends to run out the clock on the statute of limitations for Hunter and himself. That’s doable. He could also cut a deal for blanket pardons of his family if he agreed not to run. The DNC would take that deal in a heartbeat.

    It also looks increasingly likely that no Democrat will ever pardon Trump for anything. Even if Joe had some compunction about the totally hypocrisy of the Democrat Party, at least 60% of the Democrat base has devolved to cannibalism. Hypocrisy amuses them, and they will not forgive a pardon of any Republican for any reason. We are all Hitler, now.

    If I were king, I’d start a whole platoon of special counsels, targeting all the Democrat mischief over the last several years. I’d then give the DNC a choice: do I pardon everybody–including Trump–or let the chips fall where they may? Wouldn’t be a bad offer for any GOP candidate to make. I would love to see the look on the cannibals’ faces.

    Unfortunately, I am not king, the statute of limitations favors the bad guys, and Trump will probably lose in 2024 in any event.

    1. “Trump will probably lose in 2024 in any event.”

      – Diogenes

      “It’s the [disciplined leadership], stupid!”

      – James Carville

      The Framers provided the power to impose any and all voting criteria to the States.

      Turnout was 11.6% in 1788, by design – criteria were male, European, 21, 50 lbs. Sterling/50 acres.

      Ben Franklin et al. gave Americans a restricted-vote republic under the Constitution.

      One man, one vote “democracy” IS the “dictatorship of the proletariat.”

      No conservative or constitutionalist can win an election that includes communists (liberals, progressives, socialists, democrats, RINOs, AINOs) voting for “free stuff.”

      “[We gave you] a [restricted-vote] republic, if you can keep it.”

      – Ben Franklin

      You couldn’t.

      You lost your resolve; you lost your ability to lead.

      You started taking commands from your retainers, the inverse of leadership.

      Next, you’ll be too much of a pusillanimous milquetoast to kill and eat meat.

      You’ll give court to vegetarians, environmentalist wackos, LGBTQ and NAMBLA debauchery, anti-Constitution communists, UBI, reparations for phantom grievances, student loan forgiveness, illegal immigration, open-borders, alien invasions, favor derived of skin color, etc., etc., etc., ad infinitum, rather than dispatching them out of hand.

      “If you can keep it.”

      Ben Franklin knew you couldn’t…

      without a severely restricted vote and the “manifest tenor” of the U.S. Constitution.

  7. NEVER UNDERESTIMATE ED BERNAYS POWER OF PROPAGANDA! – SO – why are the DURHAM Hearings being held in PRIVATE Behind Closed Doors? (I ask ALOT of rhetorical questions) 2 “Things”- so now the DOJ/FBI is telling us that the J-6 Pipebomber Smartphone Geolocation Data was “Corrupted”? Isn’t that a coincidence/CONVENIENT?! – And the other, The DURHAM REPORT “FBI LEADERSHIP (FBI TOOL ANDREW “CNN” MCCABE – recipients of his/wife CLINTON CASH!) SABOTAGED CLINTON FOUNDATION INVESTIGATIONS” OBSTRUCTED THEIR OWN INVESTIGATION.!.. isn’t an investigation! – That is the DOJ FBI I know… spoon feed them MASSIVE / TREASONOUS FELONY CRIMINAL MISCONDUCT – THEY ATTACK YOU! One was ex-FBI Deputy Director Counterterror Jill “J-6” Sanborn after she was “Quid-Pro-Quo’s” into that role after MN FBI SAIC (Special Agent in Charge) SHEILDED PROTECTED “MILITARY INDUSTRIAL SURVEILLANCE COMPLEX ILLEGALLY SPYING / WEAPONIZED AGAINST INNOCENT/UNSUSPECTING US CITIZENS! She also put a FBI Whistleblower in Jail for exposing ILLEGAL FBI RACIAL PROFILING (Terry Albury). – You should ask me about that Jonathan. Then I can tell you the REAL reason my 2 US Senator’s (D)- Mark Dayton 2006 and (D) Al “But I can assure you this isn’t about spying on the American people” Franken 2019 (I can assure you that he know he was lying when he said that 2013!) BOTH WERE FORCED TO VACATE THEIR SEATS AFTER INVESTIGATING MY WARNINGS/CLAIMS! Actual NAT SEC THREAT ANALYST not a FAKE CIA whistleblower like Facebook Franny Haugen (FB/META/INSTAGRAM 85% CHILD PORN/CHEESE PIZZA Ctr. For Missing & Exploited Children!) or GOOG/TWTR/DARPA Peiter Zatko! Peace. Mark J. Novitsky Ephesians 6:12

  8. Jonathan: While you are working to undermine the DOJ criminal case against Trump the GOP is wasting no time in defending their leader against Jack Smith’s indictment. They have come up with a number of non-sensical defenses. Here are just a few:

    1. It’s called “the bathroom was secure” defense. Speaker McCarthy has said: “It’s a good picture to have boxes in a garage that opens up all the time? A bathroom door locks!”. No comment needed here!

    2. Then there is the “Trump’s not a spy” defense. Fox News host Mark Levin opined: “There’s not one syllable of evidence in here that any information under the Espionage Act was passed to any spies”. Levin is apparently consumed by the 1960s “I Spy” TV series about catching spies. Sen. Lindsey Graham voiced the same defense: “He is not a spy. He’s overcharged”. Of course, these claims involve a misreading of the EA that only requires that a person “willfully retains” national defense material and doesn’t return it. It doesn’t require the person actually pass that material to a foreign power.

    3. Another defense: “Trump could declassify anything he wanted”. This defense is even less persuasive. Trump never took any of the formal steps to declassify anything. In fact, Jack Smith has an audio recording of Trump holding onto docs that had not been declassified.

    4. Finally, is the “What about Biden?” defense–one many of the MAGA supporters are claiming. As usual the facts belie this non-sensical defense. Pence won’t be charged for negligently keeping classified material. Neither will Joe Biden. That’s because neither refused to return the few docs they had in their possession. They didn’t lie to the FBI nor try to obstruct the investigation. Everything was returned voluntarily. Had Trump just done the same thing he might have avoided prosecution.

    These and other pretty feeble defenses will continue to be offered to defend Trump–none of which will get anywhere before the judge presiding over the 37-count criminal trial of Donald Trump. There the facts and the law are the only things that count!

    1. @ Dennis McIntyre
      “the facts and the law are the only things that count!” Exactly right! And you chose to ignore them! Your bias is showing.

      1. No. Turkeyboi has a brilliant idea. When a party to a case has a certain amount of notoriety, try them by public opinion polls. You can dispense with all those complicated facts, laws, rules of evidence etc.

    2. Neither Biden or Pence were covered by the Presidential Records Act while Trump was. Plausible reason why Biden and Pence acted with alacrity while Trump did not. Very different circumstances. Additionally why would Biden who, apparently, removed items from a SCIF while only a Senator and then kept them for deciades while moving them from unsecure to unsecure location not be charged under the espionage act as well? Any reason you can see?

      1. Many of the documents in Trump’s possession are covered by the Federal Records Act, not the Presidential Records Act. Trump refused to return national defense information. He obstructed the investigation and conspired with Nauta to withhold documents. There’s a lot of evidence for Trump about his intent to withhold the documents, which is lacking with Pence and Biden, both of whom cooperated fully when they became aware that they had classified docs.

    3. Trump never took any of the formal steps to declassify anything.

      Dennis, Are you a liar, or retard.
      This has been covered completely.

      Instead of go over it again. The responsibility rests with you to explain what procedures are required for the President. (I’ll save you a lot of time and tell you up front. The last controlling Executive Order was by Obama. Towards the end, is the statement that excludes the President of the United States from any of the rules in the Executive Order. )

      Which is it. Short bus. Or average leftist liar?

      1. Trump is on tape admitting that he had material he hadn’t declassified.

        As you said: Are you a liar, or retard?

        1. Trump never took any of the formal steps to declassify anything.

          That’s the lie Dennis spewed, you are the worst troll ever.

          Dennis isn’t responding. But hell repeat this forever.

        2. Third parties say Trump showed documents to third parties and said they were classified. Do those documents exist? To date, no one has seen them.

          Yet you are claiming that the rustling of papers is good enough to claim classified documents were shown to others.

          You go off half-cocked and draw all sorts of conclusions. Do you think others are as foolish as you to stake their reputations on such nonsense? No. That is why many have good reputations, something you lack.

          1. “Third parties say Trump showed documents to third parties and said they were classified. Do those documents exist?”

            Third parties tell what third parties said? In essence, nodody said anything.

            Not agreeing at all, I’ll play stupid games. IF, a big IF, considering all the DoJ lies surrounding the persecution of Trump, maybe he misspoke? A little crossed up in the language.
            Its not your third party of a third party. I have seen the tape of Biden explaining he is going to build a railroad, from the Pacific Ocean, all the way across the Indian Ocean. Care to take a stab at how that is going to work? And Why it needs to be done?

      2. Are we surrounded from few or many counterflow drivers?

        “The last controlling Executive Order was by Obama. Towards the end, is the statement that excludes the President of the United States from any of the rules in the Executive Order.”
        A judge found probable cause to authorize a search warrant which was executed (aka “raided”) on 8/8/22. In affidavit EO 13,526 [1], Same goes for indictment [2]: On pages 5 7, headlined by “Classified Information” (#s 13-17) the system is explained in length. In addition, # 18 informs that # 45 didn’t obtain a waiver of the need to know requirement (Sec. 1.3.d).

        As I am under the impression that the overwhelmingly proportion of drivers go by the flow, and you and a few others drive wrong way, please cite “the statement that excludes the President of the United States from any of the rules in the Executive Order”.

        [1] https://www.archives.gov/isoo/policy-documents/cnsi-eo.html
        [2] https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.648653/gov.uscourts.flsd.648653.3.0_2.pdf

    4. How does one explain away Biden’s possession of documents dating back to his time (reported as 2017) as Senator. The questions remain how were they obtained, why were they held for so long and why were they held on a shared space with the accessible to the CCP or affiliates. Mar a Lago on the other hand is under the control of The Secret Service. There doesn’t appear to be any equivalency. And how about the over thousand boxes of documents Biden has sealed at the University of Delaware? Who knows what lies there? No, there is no equivalency, especially with how both situations are being handled.

  9. The Ds have done everything they could to keep politics out of the case. The prosecutor is independent, they have not interfered, there is not indication of anything that is not backed up by evidence.The Rs have been ranting BS all over the place. Trump clearly committed multiple federal felonies and needs to be held accountable just like anyone else.

    1. If you really believe that, I have a bridge to sell you in NYC.
      Yes, Trump does need to held accountable, like Clinton does too.

      1. That’s the problem with MAGA Trumpers, they want people to be held accountable for things they make up in their heads. And for lies, they believe.

    2. @ Sammy
      “The Ds have done everything they could to keep politics out of the case.” Exactly how do you know that Sammy? What is/was your source? Since you make the claim, please back it up so the rest of us can decide if your statement is valid.

  10. One can simultaneously believe that Trump is guilty of committing crimes AND that the indictictment and looming prosecution are politically motivated. The more I learn about Merrick Garland, the more that I realize that preventing him from joining the Supreme Court was the absolutely correct thing to do. His politicization of the Department of Justice has been an abomination. But I also believe that, if the facts laid out in the indictment are even partly true, Donald Trump has broken the law and should face the consequences.

    1. if the facts laid out in the indictment are even partly true,

      You choose to ignore the last 7 years of conduct? You are going to ignore, Biden and Obama got regular Briefings from the FBI/DoJ updating them, in person, at the White House, of the spying on the Trump Campaign, and Transition Team, and the Office of Presiden. Those briefings including all the fake intel being used to support their crimes….

      Every single President has taken documents from the White House, Every single one negotiated in good faith to voluntarily give some of the documents back to the People. NEVER has a past President been raided in his home. This is an engineered persecution.
      Like the letter from the National association of School Boards, White House staff went out and found someone to start the ball rolling, to fake a predicate, to involve the DoJ/FBI.

      In short, you are still being lied to.

    2. Just how has Garland politicized the DOJ? By appointing Jack Smith to investigate how the former president played fast and loose with some of this nation’s most important secrets?

  11. June of 2015 is now exactly 8 years ago —- that’s when the Donald and Melania came down the escalator at Trump Tower……and the announcement that Trump was putting his name in the hat seeking the GOP nomination for presidential candidate for the Nov. 2016 was ‘official.’

    If anyone has proven he can overcome the obstacles thrust in front of him by the opposition, and the Deep State as well, it is without doubt Donald Trump — I keep telling my wife to not be so sure Trump is going to be convicted, and put behind bars.

    How many indictments can one man take?

    I think that’s the question du jour —

    1. He’s been indicted more than once because he’s committed more than one crime. He’s already been convicted in a civil suit of sexual assault and defamation. And you can expect more indictments to come. He is a con artist whose time has come.

  12. “I described yesterday as the failure of Merrick Garland at the midpoint of his tenure as Attorney General. [1]”
    As this column is much more enlighten as this shortcut, I wounder why you didn’t copy paste the piece you wrote for “The Hill”.

    Professor, I don’t think you need to consult polls to see that with any legal intervention, President Trump’s base (to the chagrin of GOP leadership) doesn’t shrink.
    Lately, Alain Dershowitz has spread these sentiments:

    1. “There are many level of truth!”
    2. A group called “The 65 projects” [2] targets Trump lawyers livelihoods, which is a no-go!
    3. It’s wrong, picking the man and then let prosecutors extensively search the law books to find the crime It is here that law enforcement becomes personal. (referencing AG Robert Jackson, 4/1940)

    No one should be surprised if the MAGA grassroots don’t want to recognize the gravity of the accusations and refer to Hillary Clinton (which puts Whoopi Goldberg in fury).
    “What difference does it make if these pieces of paper rests in a storage, ballroom, bathroom, shower or elsewhere for months. They are protected by the Secret Service and didn’t harm anybody” is a common phrase by “Trumpers”. And it won’t get any better if voices are raised again that want to disqualify Trump from re-running after an insurrection indictment (in 7/23).

    “Garland has failed to restore the credibility and trust in the Justice Department. It now appears worse than when his predecessor, Bill Barr, was in office.”
    Some believe that Garland is only nominally AG (he plays more the role of a spokesperson) and in fact Monaco runs the business.
    Barr who was never a Trumpist is seen by #45 entourage as a double dealer who didn’t appoint a Special Master investigating Hillary Clinton, Joe & Hunter Biden and those federal employees who claimed the Senators Grassley & Johnson’s investigation “Hunter Biden, Burisma, and Corruption: The impact of U.S Government policy and related issues” are based on “Russia disinformation”.

    “This case could conceivably never see a jury unless Special Counsel Jack Smith succeeds in pushing for a speedy trial before the election.”
    Most likely!

    [1] https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/4054455-the-utter-failure-of-merrick-garland/
    [2] https://www.axios.com/2022/03/07/trump-election-lawyers-disbar
    [3] Barr’s answer to Senator Durbin’s (D-IL) question why he want’s this job: “Well, because I love the [Justice] Department and all its components, including the FBI. I think they’re critical institutions that are essential to preserving the rule of law, which is the heartbeat of this country … I feel that I’m in a position in life where I can provide the leadership necessary to protect the independence and reputation of the department.”

  13. He was falsely accused of Espionage by the DOJ once. It was proven false. Now during a Presidential election they’re again accusing him of Espionage when its clear at best he’s guilty of mishandling some documents which all Presidents have done to one degree or another.

    My question is how is that NOT politically motivated? Worse how is that not the current administration (not just Biden, I doubt Biden has a single coherent thought for more than 30 seconds in any given day) leveraging law enforcement to arrest and imprison their political opponents?

    Like Hitler did….

  14. Jonathan: It’s pretty clear now. From here until the election next year you will be paid to attack the DOJ under the leadership of AG Garland. It will all be about “political bias” by the DOJ in it’s criminal indictment of Donald Trump: “Garland could have taken steps to assure the public that there is not a two-tiered system of justice but repeatedly refused to do so”.

    This is also going to be the mantra by the GOP. “What about Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden?” You claim that Garland will do nothing about the “report that could detail the scope of the Biden family’s alleged influence peddling and foreign contacts”. What “report”? Neither James Comer nor Jim Jordan, who are leading the GOP House investigation of the Bidens, have come up with any evidence to support your long-standing allegations. Comer just admitted that all his Biden informants have gone “missing”.

    And now you bizarrely claim Jack Smith has failed to reach a decision on his other mandate–the Jan. insurrection. As if Smith can’t walk and chew gum at the same time. You claim “Trump’s controversial speech was constitutionally protected”. That’s a straw man! Smith’s DOJ team is investigating Trump because he organized a criminal conspiracy to overturn the 2020 election through violence. Any charging decisions will have nothing to do with protected speech. Perhaps you think Smith should have simultaneously charged Trump for both the Mar-a-Lago docs and Jan. 6. When/if Smith reaches a decision on the latter it will be based on a thorough and methodical investigation. There will be no rush to judgment.

    I hate to repeat myself but the DOJ doesn’t base charging decisions on the polls. As an experienced attorney you know that. So why keep citing polls? It serves a political purpose. To try to sow doubt in the DOJ’s indictment of Trump as the campaign intensifies next year. Trump wants to taint all the jury pools in the cases he faces and convince potential juries that the state and federal prosecutors are led by what he calls “misfits, mutants marxists and communists”. The fact that you have joined that campaign to undermine our criminal justice system speaks volumes about how you have been converted from someone who pledged to uphold the rule of law into justice the opposite!

    1. It’s pretty clear now. From here until the election next year you will be paid to attack the DOJ

      You always reach the same conclusion, but you never Challenged a single fact Turle has gotten wrong.

      Turley is not attacking the DoJ…He is documenting the Politization of the DoJ, and the constant double standard.

      Challenge the FACTS Turley presents or go out to play with 5th graders, Adults are talking here.

      1. iowan2: Well, right out of your own mouth! And I quote you: You say I never challenged “a single fact Turley has gotten wrong”. That’s why I challenged him. He got a lot of facts “wrong”. And for you to admit it makes my case. Your problem is you don’t understand plain English–something 5th graders already know quite a bit about. Now who is the “Adult” on this blog?

  15. It is a sad day that “polls’ should play an important roll in the indictment or conviction of ANY citizen for ANY alleged crime.
    If you are reading this, you are quite capable of reading the Presidential Records Act (PRA) of 1978 and the Espionage Act of 1917 (18 U.S. Code § 793e) yourself and making your own decision. And I strongly encourage you to do so.
    As you read those Acts, keep in mind the following and make your own informed decision:
    -Prior to 1978, the records of the President were considered, like it or not, HIS records. That is why the PRA was created so as to address the public interest regarding Presidential records.
    -Note, there is NO CRIMINAL PENALTY in the PRA.
    -The 1917 Espionage Act was created by Democrats and used by President Wilson against his political foes. Read up on union man Eugene Debs to see how the Espionage Act was used against a political enemy (and a union man to boot).
    -The Espionage Act of 1917 (18 U.S. Code § 793e) begins with “Whoever having unauthorized possession of, access to, or control over any document…). Does that statement apply to a President? If you say yes, that suggests there are likely 46 other presidents who have violated the Espionage Act (Biden had such records as a senator and VP) including, in spirit, those before the Act was written.

    1. RealClear Politics – Polls Election 2024 Latest Polls Saturday, June 17 – 2024 Republican Presidential Nomination Harvard-Harris

      Trump 59, DeSantis 14, Pence 8, Haley 4, Scott 2, Ramaswamy 3, Christie 2, Youngkin, Hutchinson 0, Elder, Burgum 0

      Trump +45

      General Election: Trump vs. Biden Harvard-Harris Trump 45, Biden 39

      Trump +6

  16. In 2016, before the election, the FBI created the false narrative that Trump colluded with the Russians.

    In 2020, before the election, federal intelligence agencies created the false narrative that the Hunter Biden Laptop did not belong to Hunter Biden.

    Now, after seven years of non-stop federal investigations that were focused on arresting Trump, costing tens of millions of taxpayer dollars, the DOJ has decided to indict Trump just in time for the 2024 election season, representing the third election in a row that the federal government has engaged in election interference against Trump.

    The United States Constitution requires equal protection under the law for all Americans. The selective investigation or prosecution of any American is prohibited.

    A non-corrupt judge would dismiss all charges.

    1. Courts under equal protection case law would apply the rational basis test (as opposed to strict scrutiny or intermediate scrutiny) to a claim of selective investigation and prosecution of Trump and the rational test has been an easy standard for the government to meet for the government in prior equal protection cases.

      1. Hopefully, the courts would view the 2023 indictments for what they are, the culmination of a seven-year effort by law enforcement and non-law enforcement officials at the highest levels of the federal government, cutting across multiple agencies and at least two branches of government, who attempted to prevent the election of a targeted individual to the presidency of the United States in three elections and attempted to remove the same individual from the presidency the one time he was elected.

  17. DoJ needs to be cleaned out. no one should join the Federal government until they have spent a minimum of 5 years in the private sector working at a real job

  18. “. . . allegedly staging the photo . . .”

    Sure, but don’t conclude the obvious: That the whole bloody charade is politically motivated. And that this corrupt administration has created the specter of political “criminals” — in America.

Leave a Reply