During a recent discussion on MSNBC with host Ali Velshi, Jill Wine-Banks — a former prosecutor who helped deal with the fallout from Watergate — said it might eventually arrive that Donald Trump is getting remanded to custody in connection to his consistently antagonistic public statements.
There are concerns about impacts from this commentary from Trump that specifically relates to his criminal charges — and even more specifically to the criminal case accusing him of election interference. Witness intimidation and prejudicing of the jury pool are potentially serious outcomes here, besides the potentially accompanying problems of devoted Trump fans turning from his often highly personalized attacks on his opponents to real-world violence. Georgia’s Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, who is responsible for one of Trump’s criminal cases, has been open about the threats she’s faced.
“I think eventually, they might have to,” Wine-Banks said, discussing the possibility of authorities sending Trump to custody. “What other options are there? Financial penalties haven’t worked. He re-defamed E. Jean Carroll right after a $5 million judgment.” Wine-Banks was discussing the question of enforcing the restrictions on Trump’s public commentary sought by Special Counsel Jack Smith’s team. Smith, at the Justice Department, brought the election interference allegations.
“Legally, of course it’s possible,” Wine-Banks continued, talking about how Trump facing detention might actually transpire. “Politically, would it create chaos in the country? Would it create a really dangerous situation? Maybe. On the other hand, I think there’s a lot of people in the country who are saying, ‘We need to have the justice system work; we need to have the judicial system work; we need to have accountability of all criminals.’ And so I don’t know how you can avoid taking further steps.” Willis has also spoken to this issue, saying that treating Trump differently on account of his political status — in a manner that amounts to something more favorable than what more ordinary defendants would face — would create its own serious problems.
