The
indictment
will
be
sealed,
so
the
public
won’t
know
its
contents
until
either
Trump
is
arraigned
or
someone
leaks
information.
Then,
all
hell
will
break
loose.
Trump’s
started
chiseling
around
the
corners
of
hell
already,
asking
on
social
media
that
his
supporters
“protest”
on
his
behalf.
If
Trump
were
asking
for
peaceful
protests,
that
would
be
fine.
But
January
6
should
make
any
sentient
person
question
if
that’s
what
he’s
doing.
Now
Trump’s
expected
to
hold
a
rally
in
Waco,
Texas,
on
March
25,
a
time
that
marks
the
30th
anniversary
of
the
siege
at
the
Branch
Davidian
compound.
That’s
just
the
start.
What
will
Trump
say
in
Waco?
What
will
he
say
at
the
rallies
after
that?
What
will
his
social
media
posts
advocate
after
it
sinks
in
that
he’s
facing
jail
time?
Folks
who
used
to
work
in
the
Manhattan
DA’s
office
claim
to
be
calm:
The
Manhattan
DA
has
handled
high-profile
cases
before.
All
of
the
people
involved
are
professionals.
The
security
personnel
know
how
to
handle
these
things.
We
routinely
handle
gang-murder
cases.
Don’t
worry.
Nonsense.
This
case
is
different.
You
heard
it
here
a
year
and
a
half
ago,
and
I’m
saying
it
again
today:
There
will
be
blood.
Maybe
the
Manhattan
DA’s
office
has
handled
gang-murder
cases
before.
I
wouldn’t
know.
I
never
heard
the
names
of
the
gang
members,
or
the
murderers,
or
the
victims,
or
the
witnesses,
or
the
judges
in
those
cases.
Isn’t
the
Trump
situation
a
little
different?
I
know
the
name
Trump.
And
Michael
Cohen.
And
Stormy
Daniels.
And
Allen
Weisselberg
(the
Trump
Organization’s
CFO).
And
I
could
learn
in
a
heartbeat
all
the
other
players
and
witnesses.
The
Manhattan
DA
himself,
Alvin
Bragg,
has
been
speaking
about
this
publicly,
and
Trump
has
been
dragging
Bragg’s
name
through
the
mud.
We’ll
soon
know
the
names
of
the
prosecutors,
and
the
name
of
the
judge.
We’ll
know
the
names
of
the
investigators.
We’ll
know
the
dates
and
times
of
hearings.
Who
are
the
police
and
FBI
going
to
protect?
The
judge,
around
the
clock,
for
months?
The
prosecutors,
around
the
clock,
for
months?
Michael
Cohen,
and
the
other
key
witnesses,
around
the
clock,
for
months?
The
grand
jurors,
if
their
names
leak?
The
petit
jurors,
when
the
time
comes,
and
if
their
names
leak?
Moreover,
when
the
FBI
searched
Mar-a-Lago,
someone
attacked
an
FBI
office
in
Cincinnati,
which
had
nothing
to
do
with
the
raid
but
simply
housed
part
of
the
FBI.
Who
knows
what
attacks
in
unexpected
places
will
be
triggered
by
calls
for
“protests”?
And
this
is
a
case
that
will
last
for
months,
at
a
minimum,
in
the
pretrial
stages,
as
Trump
raises
statute
of
limitation
issues,
and
challenges
to
legal
theories,
and
the
rest.
The
filing
of
every
brief,
and
the
ruling
on
every
motion,
will
be
covered
by
MSNBC
and
Fox.
Trump
will
either
rage
or
appeal,
or
both,
depending
on
the
available
options.
Trump
will
repeatedly
be
telling
his
supporters
that
the
prosecutors
are
coming
after
him
first
and
his
supporters
next.
We
know
that
some
fraction
of
those
supporters
can
be
motivated
to
violence,
as
January
6
demonstrated.
There
will
be
blood.
This
raises
two
related
questions:
First,
should
America
be
intimidated?
You
may
or
may
not
think
that
this
indictment
is
a
good
idea.
Maybe
a
former
president
shouldn’t
be
prosecuted
for
allegedly
cooking
his
company’s
books
and
committing
campaign
finance
violations.
Maybe
it’s
a
dangerous
precedent
to
let
one
of
hundreds
of
elected
state
prosecutors
decide
whether
to
pursue
a
prominent
person
in
an
opposing
political
party.
Maybe
there
are
other,
more
important
crimes
to
prosecute
in
New
York.
But
once
a
prosecutor
announces
a
case,
should
the
former
president’s
likely
attempts
to
incite
violence
cause
the
country
to
lose
its
nerve?
Or
should
we
stand
firm
once
the
indictment
is
announced
and
Trump
intensifies
his
campaign
of
intimidation?
Second,
what
the
heck
is
about
to
happen
to
the
Republican
Party?
All
the
pundits
seem
to
think
that
the
indictment
will
help
Trump
politically,
even
if
it
hurts
him
personally.
Maybe
so.
But
what
about
people
other
than
Trump?
I
assume
those
who
have
been
standing
by
Trump
to
date
will
hold
the
line,
saying
that
the
indictment
is
a
politically
motivated
witch
hunt.
But
Trump’s
case
may
reach
trial
before
the
election;
Trump
may
well
be
convicted;
it’s
hard
to
see
a
convicted
felon
winning
a
race
for
the
presidency.
What
will
Republicans
do
then?
Will
enough
of
the
Republican
Party
abandon
Trump
to
permit
the
emergence
of
a
new
conservative
party,
dedicated
to
principles
instead
of
a
person?
Maybe
some
good
will
ultimately
come
from
this.
But
first,
there
will
be
blood.
Mark Herrmann spent
17
years
as
a
partner
at
a
leading
international
law
firm
and
is
now
deputy
general
counsel
at
a
large
international
company.
He
is
the
author
of
The
Curmudgeon’s
Guide
to
Practicing
Law and Drug
and
Device
Product
Liability
Litigation
Strategy (affiliate
links).
You
can
reach
him
by
email
at inhouse@abovethelaw.com.