Trump lawyers’ 'desperate' Merrick Garland gambit was a sign of 'fear': former US attorney

According to former U.S. Attorney Barbara McQuade, a letter from two of Donald Trump's lawyers to Attorney General Merrick Garland demanding an audience to discuss special counsel Jack Smith should not be taken seriously by anyone, and is a ploy that will not help them if and when DOJ indictments come down.

In a column for MSNBC, the attorney claimed the letter -- and the way it was shared on social media -- is a sign of desperation and fear as Smith reportedly is coming to the conclusion of one of his many investigations into the former president.

Getting right to the point, McQuade wrote that after Garland's refusal, "Trump will wail that this rejection proves once again that he is a victim of witch hunts and hoaxes. The predictability of Trump’s game would be tiresome if it were not so harmful to public trust in government institutions."

The ex-U.S. attorney also noted a reference to President Joe Biden and an investigation into his son Hunter's business activities which she described as a sad Trump attempt to make the case to his followers that, "...everyone is corrupt, so support the leader who shares your values."

Writing, "Trump’s guilt or innocence has nothing to do with these other investigations, but drawing the false equivalency provides a talking point for Trump’s supporters," she explained, If Trump’s lawyers really wanted a meeting to discuss the investigation, they would not post the letter on a public website — a phone call to a member of the trial team would do."

"The final tell in the letter is its motive — fear. Sources familiar with the case told The Wall Street Journal that a charging decision in the case may be near," she elaborated. "This letter is a pre-emptive strike that Trump can use if he is indicted. He will cite the letter to show that even before he was charged, his lawyers were on record complaining of unfairness."

"Those complaints may score points in the court of public opinion, but they are irrelevant in a court of law," she predicted.

You can read her whole column here.