A CNN legal analyst pushed back on a panel on Friday attempting to discredit former President Donald Trump’s First Amendment defense relating to his third indictment.
The third indictment is related to Trump’s alleged attempt to overturn the 2020 presidential election on January 6, 2021. Special Counsel Jack Smith has charged the former president with conspiracy “Conspiracy to defraud the United States,” “Conspiracy to corruptly obstruct and impede the January 6 proceedings” and “A conspiracy against the right to vote and to have one’s vote counted.”
Many critics have argued Trump has a First Amendment right to say the 2020 election was fraudulent and should not be hit with conspiracy charges.
“Nevertheless, the offenses he’s been charged with, it will not be an effective defense to say ‘I thought that the election had been stolen from me’ because he’s not being charged for saying the election was stolen, he’s being charged for entering into conspiracies to commit fraud and even if you think you are right, even if you think something’s been taken from you, and therefore you’re gonna enter into this conspiracy to get it back, the conspiracy is still a crime,” former Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) deputy director Andrew McCabe said.
“So the fact that he may have actually thought that the election was stolen, although that’s highly debatable and many people I’m sure will come forward to say he knew it was a legitimate election, either way,” McCabe continued.
CNN senior justice correspondent Evan Perez used the analogy that a bank robber cannot commit the crime because they were delusional enough to believe the money belonged to them. Katelyn Polantz, a CNN senior crime and justice reporter, said the Jan. 6 rioters truly believed the election had been stolen but were still prosecuted for acting on it.
CNN legal analyst Elliot Williams then pushed back against them by saying the First Amendment argument is a fair defense tactic for Trump’s attorneys to make. He added Trump had heard the 2020 election allegations from several sources in his orbit, which could lead him to believe his claims. (RELATED: ‘I’m Gonna Interject Here’: Harris Faulkner Breaks Up Testy Debate Over Trump Indictment’s ‘Red Herring’)
“I want to be clear, though, it’s not an entirely unfair argument for the president’s attorneys to make, at least as a defense to say that while there was a multiplicity of ideas around me from attorneys and staff and so on and it was confusing, we took opinions from a lot of people,” Williams said.
However, he argued that Trump “recklessly” disregarded “an obvious truth” that the election was not stolen.
Former Assistant Attorney Andy McCarthy told Fox News on Tuesday that Smith is trying to “distort statutes” not put in place by Congress in order to charge Trump for allegedly overturning the election. He also argued it is difficult to prove that Trump did not genuinely believe the election was stolen.