'Unconvinced': Ex-federal prosecutor shows why Trump's Jan. 6 case defense falls flat
August 01, 2023
A legal expert on Tuesday gave Donald Trump’s legal team high marks for signaling how they plan to defend the former president but gave them a flunking grade for the merits of their argument.
Former federal prosecutor Elie Honig during an appearance on CNN’s “The Source with Kaitlan Collins” was asked by co-host Anderson Cooper whether the argument presented by Trump attorney John Lauro in a previous segment asserting that the former president rightfully asserted his First Amendment rights in alleging the 2020 election was fraudulent resonated with him.
Honig's comments followed Tuesday's Justice Department announcement of new charges against Trump over allegations the former president tried to overturn the 2020 election.
“Interesting take, I'm unconvinced by the First Amendment argument, and here's why,” Honig said.
“Even if you take it as a given that the First Amendment is extremely broad, especially in the arena of political speech, it's simply not true to quote the lawyer as he said, First Amendment protects speech. That's not true.”
Honig then cited fraud as an example in which lying is not Constitutionally protected speech.
“Now, lying itself is usually protected by the First Amendment, but lying to steal something, that is criminal and that is fraudulent,” Honig said.
“The theory made in this indictment is that you lied in order to steal the election. There's also factual problems, one of them being that a lot of these statements in the indictment were not made behind the podium, they were not made to the media. They were made by Donald Trump and others behind the scenes to try to influence people and so there's much less of a First Amendment concern there."
“But I think that's a really fascinating insight into the way they intend to defend this case.”
Watch the video below or click here.
Leave a Comment
Related Post