Fox News Legal Analyst Slams Fani Willis for ‘Excessive’ and ‘Dangerous’ Trump Indictment: ‘The Jackson Pollock School of Prosecution’


After a late-night indictment on Monday, the morning shows were abuzz over the fourth indictment of former President Donald Trump, this time in Georgia for 13 felonies, all in an attempt to overturn the 2020 election results in the state. On Fox News, constitutional law expert Jonathan Turley called the charges “excessive” and “dangerous.”

As America’s Newsroom anchor Bill Hemmer showed off a printout of the hefty 98-page indictment, he asked Turley about his thoughts on what was contained inside. His impression was that this was “criminalizing challenges to elections,” and that both major political parties do it regularly. It’s a perfectly legal request for judicial review. Turley’s biggest criticism seems to be with the woman who brought the case, Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis and the sheer breadth of the charges:

What’s concerning, particularly about this is that Willis didn’t really show any semblance of restraint. She indicted everyone for everything she could think of. It is sort of the Jackson Pollock School of Prosecution. She threw it all against the canvas. And I think she is hoping that some of these other co-defendants will flip.

On the RICO charge, Turley speculated:

I think partially she went with the RICO charge is because she’s quite familiar with it. This is a prosecutor who made her name bringing RICO state, RICO cases. Also, it allows for this type of overarching conspiracy. I mean, she is listing over 160 acts. There often phone calls, meetings, tweets. She just calls them all criminal. She says that they all were knowingly false. And with that broad brush, she’s able to indict everyone and bring in 19 people into that courtroom. That’s the benefit of using a racketeering approach. But it also increases the danger for the country in terms of how we will handle contested elections in the future.

Watch the video above via Fox News.

Have a tip we should know?

Filed Under: