Legal expert explains why Trump's Jan. 6 charges are different from his past 2 indictments

On Tuesday a federal grand jury in Washington, D.C., indicted former President Donald Trump on four felony charges related to his attempts to retain power and overturn Joe Biden’s win in the 2020 presidential election, an effort that ultimately resulted in the deadly Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol.

“The attack on our nation’s Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, was an unprecedented assault on the seat of American democracy,” special counsel Jack Smith said during a press conference following the indictment Tuesday. “As described in the indictment, it was fueled by lies.”

The former president appeared in person at the federal courthouse in D.C. on Thursday afternoon for his arraignment, where he pleaded not guilty to all four counts.

This indictment is Trump’s third since leaving the White House, and it comes amid the looming threat of a fourth set of criminal charges from Fulton County, Ga., District Attorney Fani Willis, who is investigating Trump's and his allies’ efforts to overturn the 2020 election results in her state.

Yahoo News spoke with Andrew Bernstein, a criminal defense attorney with law firm Armstrong Teasdale, to unpack the charges in the third indictment and what they could mean for Trump’s 2024 reelection bid. Some answers have been lightly edited for length and clarity.

What are the charges and what do they mean?

Count one: conspiracy to defraud the United States. Allegedly, Donald Trump and his co-conspirators got together in an attempt to prevent the certification of a lawful federal election.

Count two: conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding. Allegedly, Trump and his co-conspirators agreed to try and stop the actual certification of the election on Jan. 6, 2021.

Count three: obstruction of, and attempt to obstruct, an official proceeding. This is the allegation of the attempt to stop the Jan. 6 election certification [by putting forth the slate of fake electors, transmitting those documents to Mike Pence] and the outright attempts by attorneys and Trump saying, "Do not certify the election, Mike Pence."

Count four: conspiracy against rights. This is saying Trump allegedly conspired with others to try to prevent the counting of lawful votes cast by U.S. citizens.

Democratic leaders called this third indictment of Trump the "most consequential" thus far. Do you agree with that?

I think politically, and as a democracy, this indictment is unquestionably the most consequential because we're talking about affirmative steps alleged to have been taken to prevent votes from being counted and to prevent the certification of the election.

I think for Donald Trump, the Mar-a-Lago indictment legally is the most consequential. Legally, the reason the justice system is very heavy-handed in classified material cases is that the mishandling of classified information can potentially lead to the death of United States citizens and it can lead to the downfall of our intelligence operation.

Are there differences between the federal grand jury pools in D.C., where the Jan. 6 case will be tried, versus Florida, where the Mar-a-Lago case will be tried?

Not really. I understand that the demographics are very different, with D.C. being heavily Democratic and anti-Trump, and parts of Florida are heavily Republican and pro-Trump, but the standard of a grand jury is just so low that I think no matter what your political bent is, it's such a straightforward process. There's not much to hang your hat on to not indict someone if the government puts forth credible evidence.

I think D.C. and Florida are similar in that in both places it may be very difficult to pick a jury quickly.

The reason I have faith in jurors is you're talking about husbands, wives, parents, partners, employees, employers, regular people who have a lot to lose.

If Trump is convicted of any of the criminal counts he’s been charged with so far, could that prevent him from becoming president again in 2024, if reelected?

In the Constitution, the requirements to be the president of the United States are very scant. [A person must be at least 35 years old, must be a natural-born citizen and must have lived in the U.S. for at least 14 years.] If he's convicted of all of these charges, I don't see the automatic invocation of the 14th Amendment, where he is barred because he was found to be part of an insurrection. Those charges just aren't there.

We’re living in a world where Trump can be convicted in Manhattan, he can be convicted in the Jan. 6 case, he can be convicted in the Mar-a-Lago documents case — and still be elected.