re: Trial Expert Tells CNN Lack Of Evidence Could Lead To Trump Acquittal Even With Dem Jury

If you cannot explain the crime in under a minute, chances are a jury will think you are reaching. Honestly, I can't see how a judge would have allowed a trial even with an indictment. It's so thin it makes Kate Moss look like my 660lb life person.

A thing that is not a crime, is a crime being done in furtherance of something that is not a crime because you wouldn't have jurisdiction over it anyway but has already been looked into and was declined by the Feds and anyway you had declined to prosecute earlier as did your predecessor because there was nothing there. But now, all of a sudden the thing that was not there is there but you as a prosecutor can't tell us exactly what is there that you think might be there but there might be four of them there but the other three are not there but you want a jury to figure out what is there that you cannot decide exactly what is there. There is a crime there but only you can you cannot tell us where. So where is there guilt if you cannot decide where the defendant broke the law.

It really is that simple. You the jury get to choose one of the four because we don't know which of the four he violated. All we know is that he did something.