In a recent article, well-known conservative attorney Andrew McCarthy, who is typically critical of President Trump, dissected the garbage indictment of Trump by corrupt Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis. McCarthy’s analysis revealed a “giant hole” in the indictment that could potentially warrant its immediate dismissal.
As previously reported by Breaking Digest, Willis announced late Monday night an indictment against Trump and 18 other Republicans, comprising a total of 41 charges, including RICO and Conspiracy.
Included in the 18 co-defendants are Mark Meadows, Jenna Ellis, John Eastman, Rudy Giuliani, and Sidney Powell, Jeffrey Clark, Mike Roman.
McCarthy wrote (bolding added for emphasis):
Why has DA Willis invoked Georgia’s version of the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, which is typically applied to mobsters engaged in the familiar rackets of murder, extortion, trafficking in narcotics and stolen goods, gambling, prostitution and so on? Because there’s a giant hole in her case: the lack of a clear crime to which Trump and his co-defendants can plausibly be said to have agreed.
McCarthy temporarily sets aside the discussion of RICO charges and delves into a comprehensive explanation of the concept of a conspiracy. He highlights that a conspiracy involves an agreement to break a criminal law, requiring a minimum of two individuals.
Furthermore, McCarthy clarifies that “there must be a meeting of the minds about the crime that is the objective of the conspiracy.” If an agreement about the criminal act does not exist, then a conspiracy cannot be established.
The constitutional procedure mandates that individuals cannot be accused of a crime and compelled to undergo a trial unless there is reasonable suspicion that a crime has occurred.
In his article, McCarthy further underscores the significance of Americans understanding the reason behind the charges against defendants in a specific case. He proceeds to highlight the fact that Willis is prosecuting Trump for an act that is entirely lawful (attempting to challenge the outcome of the 2020 election), which McCarthy characterizes as “strange.”
That is what’s so strange about DA Willis’s indictment. She alleges that the 19 people named in her indictment are guilty of conspiracy because they agreed to try to keep Donald Trump in power as president — specifically, to “change the outcome of the election in favor of Trump.”
Trying to change an election outcome is legal; the end doesn’t become illegal if pursued by illegal means — instead, those illegal means can be charged as crimes. But there is no conspiracy unless the objective itself is clearly a crime. You don’t see prosecutors alleging, say, that defendants were in a “conspiracy to unlawfully” commit murder or robbery. Murder and robbery are crimes.
If two or more people agree to commit murder or robbery, that is an agreement to commit a crime — a conspiracy. To the contrary, an agreement to try to reverse the result of an election is not an agreement to commit a crime.
Pivoting to the RICO conspiracy allegations against Trump and the other 18 defendants, McCarthy points out that a RICO conspiracy involves a pact to be part of such an enterprise — to belong to the group and support it so that it continues to yield power and profits (such as a mafia family).
McCarthy’s analysis completely exonerates President Trump since there was no organized effort and no crime committed.