Trump faces 'substantial' legal risk in Georgia case, think tank report says

Greg Bluestein and Tamar Hallerman, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution on

Published in Political News

Trump’s advisers have dismissed the probe as politically motivated.

“This is simply the Democrats’ latest attempt to score political points by continuing their witch hunt against President Trump, and everybody sees through it,” confidant Jason Miller said in a statement after the investigation was launched this spring.

As a part of their legal analysis, the authors of the Brookings report explored the legal defenses Trump’s lawyers could mount should the Fulton investigation eventually lead to the courtroom.

They said he can’t be immune because “a candidate who believes he has won an election does not enjoy any legal warrant to commit possible crimes in furtherance of that belief.” And second, because “there is an extraordinary absence of any evidence suggestive of irregularity in any respect in the Georgia process.”

In an interview with the Journal-Constitution, Eisen said the state’s responsibility to count the ballots cast by its citizens and certify the presidential election results is paramount over the desires of a political candidate — even that of a president.

“The president doesn’t have the right to overturn state elections to benefit himself,” Eisen said. “He doesn’t have any role in state elections.”

Eisen said he wouldn’t be surprised if Trump details his grievances about Georgia officials’ handling of the 2020 election during his appearance in Perry over the weekend.


“His statements and those of his allies have unfortunately contained a great deal of false information and disinformation, and that’s another reason that it’s important to put the undisputed facts out there in great detail,” Eisen said, mentioning one of the reasons he and his colleagues produced the report.

The authors said that beyond analyzing the public facts and the law itself, it isn’t their place to say what should happen to Trump. They strongly suggest, however, that prosecutors can build a potent case against the former president.

“There can be no doubt that prosecutors should take extra care and deliberation when considering charges against former public officials and those associated with them,” the authors wrote.

“But if they were somehow exempt, or ultimately subject to different and lower standards of liability, that would betray the core ideas of American justice.”


©2021 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. Visit at ajc.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.