A show trial for our banana republic

I've been perusing some legal analyses on the Trump indictment and they all have a common theme: this is a criminalization of political speech and it pivots on (somehow) proving what was in Trump's mind.   Here's a good section from "Show Trial, American Style":

But there’s a larger reason why the election fraud case is a sham. From election day through January 20 (and even now), millions believed there was election fraud. This was a grievance held by American citizens, Donald Trump among them. They had the right to assemble and to petition their government to redress their grievances. The First Amendment doesn’t qualify this right by inquiring whether the grievances are sincerely held, or if the grievances are backstopped by evidence, or if the petitioners are being deceitful. It’s political speech. In this respect, the indictment’s extensively documented examples of Trump’s badgering and misrepresentations are irrelevant. He had a grievance, and his actions from November 14 through January 20 must fall within the First Amendment’s meaning of “petition the government.” If it doesn’t, then neither does shouting at your congressman about election fraud. Smith knew all of this. The indictment says as much: “[Trump] had a right, like every American, to speak publicly about the election and even to claim, falsely, that [it was fraudulent.]” That he indicted Trump anyway indicates this will be a show trial. Its purpose is not to find out if Trump lied or even if there was election fraud. Its purpose is to demonstrate publicly that questioning the regime narrative will not be protected by the First Amendment.

George Washington professor Jonathan Turley is not impressed: 

And I have to tell you, this indictment is really sad moment for me. I hoped that Smith is going to indict on January 6th, that he would find unassailable evidence and unquestioned legal authority. He has neither in this indictment...

This is a speaking indictment but it doesn't say very much. It basically just says that we think Trump is lying that he actually didn't believe this. I can't tell you how facially ridiculous this claim is. It starts up by saying, of course, you can say false things in the campaign, but then says that Trump knew they were false. Is that the test going forward in terms of criminalizing political speech?

Smith is just not only going to have to just bulldoze through the First Amendment, he's going to have to bulldoze through a line of cases by the Supreme Court.

They hate Trump at the National Review and they think this indictment stinks:

Whether misconduct rises to the level of an impeachable offense is indefinite, left to the people’s representatives to assess based on what the facts and circumstances say about a public official’s fitness for duty. Criminal offenses are the antithesis of that. They must be defined by statute with sufficient clarity so that the average person knows what is forbidden, and a defendant is presumed innocent. A guilty verdict must be supported by proof beyond a reasonable doubt — proof not only that the person performed the statutorily prohibited acts, but also did so knowing that his conduct was illegal.

Here, it is not even clear that Smith has alleged anything that the law forbids. The indictment relates in detail Trump’s deceptions, but that doesn’t mean they constitute criminal fraud. As the Supreme Court reaffirmed just a few weeks ago, fraud in federal criminal law is a scheme to swindle victims out of money or tangible property. Mendacious rhetoric in seeking to retain political office is damnable — and, again, impeachable — but it’s not criminal fraud, although that is what Smith has charged. Indeed, assuming a prosecutor could prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump hadn’t actually convinced himself that the election was stolen from him (good luck with that), hyperbole and even worse are protected political speech.

These are just a handful of the legal opinions I've read.  The other side doesn't even attempt to make a legal argument; it's just the usual Orange Man Bad bleating.  As I noted last night (and stolen by Twitchy today!), if lying about elections is now going to be a crime, the DOJ is going to be busy indicting Martin Sheen and Stacey Abrams.