The one-page signed affidavit filed with the court Friday was Trump's unsuccessful attempt to end the civil contempt and daily fine of $10,000 per day imposed on him earlier this week by New York state Judge Arthur Engoron. After a brief telephonic hearing Friday morning, the judge denied Trump's motion to purge the contempt.
The ex-president’s testimony-given in a lawsuit that alleges his security guards assaulted demonstrators outside Trump Tower in 2015 - was made public last week by the attorneys for the plaintiffs in the case.
Based on the available evidence, there is no basis to prosecute Trump and little reason even to open a criminal investigation. Federal criminal prosecutions can take place only pursuant to specific statutes, so it's worth analyzing some of the laws that critics say Trump may have violated.
But actual prosecutions are not, and Donald Trump should be the beneficiary of this tradition, even if he himself would surely not offer such grace to others.
This law prohibits anyone who "incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto." In the first place, this law has almost never been invoked. The leading precedent on the statute comes from a case from 1863!
This law bans "attempts to deprive or defraud residents of a State of a fair and impartially conducted election process, by . [the] tabulation of ballots known by the person to be materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent." Under this theory, by instructing his attorney general to say there was fraud in Georgia, Trump committed this crime.
This law makes it a crime to corruptly obstruct, influence or impede any official proceeding or attempt to do so. Once more, the issue would be intent -- here reflected in the word "corruptly." In his January 6 speech, Trump encouraged the crowd to march to Capitol Hill but he did not explicitly encourage violence.
The Hatch Act prohibits federal employees from engaging in partisan political activity. The president himself is explicitly exempt from the strictures of the Hatch Act, but could be charged with the provision that makes it "unlawful for any person to intimidate, threaten, command, or coerce" a federal employee to "engage in ...
This broad provision, much loved by prosecutors, makes it a crime to "conspire to commit any offense against the United States, or to defraud the United States." The first part of this law runs into the same problem as the specific statutes noted above -- that it's difficult to prove an underlying crime.