Watergate prosecutors anticipate DOJ has even more evidence against Trump for indictment than is known

Former federal prosecutor Joyce White Vance and Watergate prosecutor Jill Wine-Banks agreed that Attorney General Merrick Garland doesn't care whether Donald Trump is running for president. If Garland wants to indict the former president, he'll indict the former president.

Speaking to MSNBC on Sunday, the two legal experts, host Alicia Menendez quoted an NBC News report saying that the DOJ does have the evidence to indict Trump.

“If Trump were anyone else, he would have already faced a likely indictment,” said lawyer Bradley Moss, speaking to NBC News for the report.

"The one caveat I'd add," began Vance, "we have a public rendition of the evidence. DOJ likely has more. Some of the evidence can make their case stronger. It's possible they could have evidence that is exculpatory, it tends to exclude the possibility that the former president committed a crime. I think that's very unlikely, but we should always be aware that DOJ has information we don't have access to. Regarding your question about whether the announcement will impact of the DOJ investigation, the answer to that, is absolutely not. We've heard Merrick Garland repeatedly tell the public that he will pursue investigations without fear and favor, follow the evidence wherever it leads. My take when I've heard him say that over and over, is he is speaking directly about the former president in the very understated language that's required of an attorney general."

Wine-Banks agreed, noting that there won't likely even be a delay in Garland's announcement that Trump is being indicted, even if he announces on Thursday.

"I know he's getting a lot of pressure from Republicans not to make an announcement," she explained. "It could negatively impact the Georgia runoff. Even if he announces, being a candidate for president doesn't mean you aren't subject to the laws, you aren't subject to being held accountable for violations of crimes that you have committed in the past. As Joyce said, there could be exculpatory evidence. It's highly unlikely if there, was we wouldn't have heard it. If there was, his lawyers would have announced. So, I am assuming, there's only more evidence against him, than we already know publicly and that is already sufficient to indict."

See the full conversation below:

Watergate prosecutors anticipate DOJ has even more evidence against Trump for indictment than known www.youtube.com