Dan Abrams: Indicting Trump Over the Stormy Daniels Hush Money Scandal Would Be a ‘Big Mistake’

NewsNation host and Mediaite founder Dan Abrams argued that it would be a “big mistake” both legally and politically to indict former President Donald Trump over the Stormy Daniels hush money scandal.

Abrams led his show on Monday night by discussing the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office’s potentially indicting Trump for breaking campaign finance law with the plot to pay Daniels off and legally prohibit her from speaking about their affair. To explain why he thinks an indictment would be a legal and political mistake, Abrams began by noting that the DA’s office is trying to charge Trump for the scandal under state law, years after federal prosecutors already decided not to do so.

“But that’s just part of the problem,” Abrams said.

The law that Trump allegedly violated is a misdemeanor. Potentially charging the former president for an incident that occurred almost seven years ago, and it’s minor stuff. Falsifying business records by claiming that the $130,000 payoff to Daniels for keeping quiet about their affair was actually for legal expenses. Now, the DA might try to elevate the crime to a felony by claiming the intent to defraud included an intent to commit or conceal a second crime, and that one being a violation of New York state election law. They would argue that the payoff was done to protect his campaign and effectively became an improper donation.

Putting aside how long ago this happened. Putting aside the fact of the Manhattan DA’s office — under a different DA — examined this case in 2018 and decided not to move forward with it. Putting aside the fact that this new DA, Alvin Bragg, was in office for over a year before he seemed to suddenly become interested in this old case. Put all that aside, it also could be a really hard legal case. This effort at making it a felony would be a novel legal theory, and proving that the payment was made for the purposes of protecting the campaign as opposed to — say, protecting him from his wife, Melania, finding out — would be difficult. Other prosecutors have failed in similar efforts in campaign finance cases, and this was not even a New York state election. It was a federal election!

Abrams summarized by assessing that the DA’s office failed to bring a “clean” case against Trump, and that even if the ex-president was convicted of a felony, he might not face jail time for it. On the political side of the case, Abrams questioned the circumstances of Bragg’s interest in it, and he warned that Republicans would consolidate around Trump’s “legitimate argument” that the case is politically tainted.

Now, the former president denies ever having had an affair with Stormy Daniels. Do I believe that? Of course not. Do I think he paid the money to Daniels for exactly the reasons [Michael] Cohen claims? Yeah. But that does not mean that criminal charges should be brought in this case, at this time, against this defendant.

And to those on the Left who say, ‘Well, if it was me or anyone else, he would be charged. why is this any different?’ I say, that’s not true. Any good prosecutor would, should look at this old, relatively-minor and difficult case with a tainted star witness and say ‘Not worth it.’ But I feel this prosecutors allowing politics to seep into a case that is already fraught with allegations of bias. Now that the criminal tax and bank fraud cases have fizzled legally, this one has the feel of a desperate long shot.

Watch above via NewsNation.