Washington Post columnist calls Bragg's Trump case as 'dangerous leap on the highest of wires'

Washington Post columnist Ruth Marcus, who said she wants former President Donald Trump to be found guilty in Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg's case against him, is also criticizing the 34-count criminal indictment of Trump because of the legal ground on which it relies. 

In an opinion article Tuesday titled, "The Trump indictment is a dangerous leap on the highest of wires," Marcus said the indictment unsealed after Trump's arraignment earlier that day "is disturbingly unilluminating, and the theory on which it rests is debatable at best, unnervingly flimsy at worst."

Though Marcus said she hopes prosecutors will win the case against Trump, she also said, "[T]he fears I had in the weeks leading up to the indictment about the strength of the case against Trump were in no way allayed by Tuesday’s developments."

She also said the indictment and the district attorney's underlying facts presented in the case "offers almost nothing in the way of new evidence against Trump."

The case against Trump is dependent on the fact that it is illegal in New York to falsify business records, and while normally this would be a misdemeanor, if the records are falsified with the intent to defraud and conceal another crime, then the charge is upgraded to a felony.

"Okay, but what are the other crimes Trump is accused of covering up? The indictment doesn’t say," Marcus wrote. "This is not well-trodden legal territory."

Marcus is not the only opponent of Trump to question the indictment. Former Trump Attorney General Bill Barr, whose relationship with the former president has deteriorated since leaving the administration, said last week that the indictment is a "disgrace" and a "political hit job."