Summary: <p>With the news this week that the Supreme Court gave the go-ahead for Manhattan District Attorney Cy Vance to obtain key financial documents relating to Donald Trump, some news consumers may find themselves wrapped up in the delectable prospect of seeing a rule-breaking, tax-dodging, Constitution-shedding president on trial. They have been encouraged by commentators who claim that every little investigatory development is "very, very bad for Trump"; that the prosecution of Donald Trump "could go to trial sooner than you think"; and that Trump's post-election behavior "basically guarantees" criminal charges. </p> <p>Writer, lawyer, and former federal prosecutor Ankush Khardori has his critiques of this genre of punditry — in August he described some of it as <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/will-the-manhattan-district-attorney-be-the-new-robert-mueller-11597683723">"insane"</a> in the <em>Wall Street Journal</em> — but he has also published <a href="https://www.nybooks.com/daily/2020/11/20/the-case-for-prosecuting-trump/">his own theory</a> for prosecuting the president. In this interview, originally recorded in December, he and Brooke discuss what he sees as the "structural flaws" in most discussions of post-presidential prosecution.</p> <p><em>This interview originally aired as part of our December 11th, 2020 program, </em><a href="https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/otm/episodes/on-the-media-last-wish"><em>Last Wish</em></a><em>.</em></p> <p> </p>
