Fani Willis’ case against Donald Trump just fell apart because of one fatal flaw

When Fani Willis indicted Donald Trump last August, Democrats were cheering.

That may not be the case anymore.

And Fani Willis’ case against Donald Trump just fell apart because of one fatal flaw.

Former U.S. Attorney exposes the weakness in Willis indictment 

Fani Willis indicted Donald Trump and his co-defendants on RICO charges arguing they “made false statements concerning fraud in the November 3, 2020, Presidential election.” 

Donald Trump filed a motion with Judge McAfee to dismiss the charges on First Amendment grounds arguing Willis sought to criminalize protected political activity.

But former U.S. Attorney Brett Tolman told Fox News host Dana Perino that in any RICO indictment the prosecution has to present a pattern of criminal activity as part of establishing a conspiracy.

Tolman said what stood out to him was the only pattern the state presented largely consisted of Trump’s team working through the court system to legitimately contest the results.

“I found it fascinating that the county attorney, you may have heard him make reference to the pattern, the pattern is the part of the racketeering charge, a pattern of corruption or criminal activity that has to be presented,” Tolman stated. “And he is throwing that in because the indictment itself is incredibly weak in terms of its treatment of a pattern of criminal behavior.”

Tolman explained it’s hard to make the case that Trump and his supporters attempted to corruptly contest the results of the election when their efforts – even the attempt to submit an alternate slate of electors – took place within the confines of the established court system.

“When you have, you know, folks like Ronna or you have in Georgia and other states you have individuals suggesting that the electors need to be replaced, that they don’t have it right there is fraud that has occurred, I mean then they challenge it in court, that’s very difficult to say that’s a pattern of corruption or criminal activity when they are doing it through the court system,” Tolman concluded.

Criminal cases against Donald Trump invented crimes where none existed

The other criminal trials against Donald Trump followed a similar fact pattern.

Democrat prosecutors Jack Smith and Alvin Bragg conjured up novel legal theories to create criminal activity they either couldn’t prove under existing law – or in Bragg’s case – didn’t have jurisdiction over.

Smith indicted Trump for contesting the election and urging Mike Pence to reject Electoral College results on January 6.

There is no specific law on the books declaring anything Trump did illegal.

What Smith really did was take the second impeachment of Donald Trump and turn it into a criminal case claiming Trump conspired to defraud the United States.

But the Supreme Court held on multiple occasions that to be guilty of fraud, a defendant has to cheat someone out of money or property.

That isn’t the case here.

Similarly, Bragg is trying to prosecute Trump for a federal campaign finance violation that Joe Biden’s Justice Department says never took place and that Bragg – as a county level district attorney – has no authority to indict Trump.

Willis’ indictment also falls into this category as her entire case rests on the idea it’s illegal for a Republican to challenge an election result.

*Renewed Right Official Polling*