Alan Dershowitz says there's evidence to indict Trump, but warns against it

Former Harvard Law School professor Alan Dershowitz said Saturday there's currently enough evidence to indict former president Donald Trump based on his interpretation of the heavily redacted FBI affidavit.

"Any grand jury in DC would indict Trump on the evidence that he had classified material in violation of various statutes," Dershowitz told the New York Post. But, he cautioned the Department of Justice against pursuing the case.

The lawyer has represented well-known clients like Mike Tyson and Julian Assange. Dershowitz cited the probe's failure to meet what he called the Nixon and Clinton tests; the former being the ability to establish broad bipartisan support, and the latter being able to demonstrate that Trump's conduct was worse than former secretary of state Hillary Clinton’s own past mishandlings of classified information.

"Getting a search warrant is easy to do, and a grand jury will indict a ham sandwich so that is why we need prosecutorial discretion," said Dershowitz, who was part of the former president's defense team during Trump's first impeachment trial.

Dershowitz said public anger should not be directed at Judge Bruce Reinhart for signing off on the search, but at Attorney General Merrick Garland for seeking the warrant.

"By the DOJ's own regulations, you don’t seek a search warrant unless that’s the only way you can get the material," Dershowitz said.

Many are suspicious of Reinhart's motives after it was revealed the judge previously represented the late sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein, who received federal immunity for allegedly trafficking underage girls.

The censored FBI affidavit justifying the raid on Trump's Mar-a-lago residence states that federal agents were looking for top-secret documents they believed were in the 45th president's possession.

Of the 184 classified documents retrieved, 25 were marked as top secret, 92 were labeled secret and another 67 were confidential, the affidavit says.