The charge that Fulton County Dist.

dir

Att

ears

j

.

Fani Willis unveiled a panoramic summary of the former president’s misdeeds on Monday night

Donald

Trump and his allies allegedly committed to illegally retain power in the months following the 2020 election. The core charge against Trump and 18 other defendants is a violation of Georgia’s version of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, or RICO, traditionally used to prosecute organized crime.

About half of the charge consists of reciting 161 overt acts in furtherance of the RICO offense, 40 of which are crimes in themselves. It covers much of what we learned from the House Jan. 6 committee and Trump’s federal impeachment

for at the expense of

in an attempt to overturn the 2020 election, adding details such as those about a plot to infiltrate voting systems in rural Coffee County.

Despite covering much familiar territory,

However,

Trump’s fourth indictment in four months is something new in the effort to hold the former president accountable. It is in many ways the prosecution’s most aggressive response to this shameful chapter of our history.

The RICO law allowed Willis to wrap up a Georgia suit containing much of Trump and company’s nationwide plan to steal the election, which extended to five other states. Beneath the statue’s spacious structure, it alleges that the 19 defendants participated in a criminal enterprise to keep Trump in power beyond his elected term.

If that sounds amorphous, it’s because it is, as RICO’s critics have long argued. But prosecutors can satisfy the RICO charge by proving only two out of 40

predicate

crimes

charged

,

what something that

probably won’t be a heavy burden.

One of the main differences between the Fulton County indictment and

its predecessors the federal case

is the admission of 18 defendants alongside Trump. These alleged criminals range from what Mike Pence called the bunch of idiot lawyers who surrounded and supported Trump Rudy Giuliani, John Eastman and the others

WHO

Special Prosecutor Jack Smith named as unnamed co-conspirators of lesser-known Georgia players who took part in more provincial aspects of the plot. While Smith’s indictment on January 6 was an arrow aimed straight at Trump, Willis is a blunderbuss.

The plethora of defendants has several implications. Perhaps most importantly, it pressures them to cooperate against the other defendants, especially Trump. That’s especially true because it’s a state matter rather than a federal one, meaning someone convicted cannot hope for a pardon from Trump or any other Republican president.

The mass of alleged accommodations could represent a major step forward in the pursuit of accountability. Just as Watergate climaxed with the imprisonment of several of the president’s men, justice for Trump’s misdeeds must extend to the brutal lawlessness of those who enabled and carried out his schemes.

The mob of defendants also poses colossal logistical problems for the Fulton County system. Willis said during her brief remarks Monday night that she wants to try them all together. But the prospect of a trial of 19 defendants with a former president is more than a challenge; it is almost unfathomable. We should expect the number to shrink as defendants choose to cooperate and are subdivided into

a

more manageable groups.

Another noteworthy feature of the indictment is that most of the charged conduct also violated federal law and was committed by a president and his allies while in office. That is in stark contrast to Manhattan Dist

. dir

Att

or

j

.

Alvin Braggs case, which involves violations of New York law, mostly before Trump took office.

This constitutes a legal and a policy dilemma. First, Trump can and will make sure that the case should be transferred to federal court because it involves official conduct he has engaged in as president. Willis will likely respond by stating that Trump’s alleged crimes were outside the parameters of his official duties.

Willis’ argument should probably prevail, as it has in other cases involving Trump’s highly unpresidential post-election behavior. But if not, prosecutors from Willis’ office could be forced to try the case in an unfamiliar federal court, with a federal jury pool and under federal procedures.

The policy point is that, as just as Willis’s case is, and as overwhelming as the evidence is, it raises legitimate questions about the local prosecution of a former president. That’s the line that

south carolina

Senator Lindsey Graham

(RS.C.)

immediately took to Fox News and asked: Are we going to have prosecutors prosecute the President of the United States, the former President of the United States? You open Pandora’s box.

Trump’s latest indictment also differs from the others because of the government-friendly laws that will apply during the trial. Those start with RICO, whose Georgia version is unusually comprehensive and includes basic acts like perjury not included in the federal counterpart.

Georgia also has stricter laws regulating release conditions that tend toward pre-trial detention, including requiring defendants to demonstrate that they pose no risk of intimidation to witnesses. Given Trump’s history, imagine the challenge that will be before his lawyers when he is arranged, probably later this month.

Georgia also has strong provisions for a speedy trial that would allow another defendant to demand trial in a matter of months, which could corner Trump.

Even if it repackages much known evidence and treads some of the ground covered by another prosecution, Trump’s fourth indictment is much more than stacking. In some ways, it’s the most far-reaching and ominous response to Trump’s assault on democracy.

Harry Litman is the host of the

Talking Feds podcast

.

@harrylitman