A spokeswoman for Donald Trump ripped into the Biden Justice Department and special counsel Jack Smith after the former president appeared in a federal court on Thursday to be arraigned on new felony charges related to the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol Building.

Alina Habba, herself an attorney, blasted the charges as overt “election interference at its finest” in front of the courthouse after Trump appeared.

Earlier, Trump arrived in the nation’s capital to appear for his third indictment and his second by Smith, who charged him with four felony counts, including conspiracy to defraud the United States, conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, obstruction of an attempt to obstruct an official proceeding, and conspiracy against rights.

During her press conference, Habba noted that all of Trump’s indictments appear to come as first son Hunter Biden and President Joe Biden appear in the news amid allegations of corruption. She pointed to former business partner Devon Archer’s closed-door testimony before a House committee on Monday, which was followed up by Trump’s indictment on Tuesday.

“This is not a coincidence. This is election interference at its finest against the leading candidate right now for president for either party,” Habba said (see video below). “President Trump is under siege in a way that we have never seen before. President Trump and his legal team and everyone on his team will continue to fight, not for him, but for the American people.”

She added that the ongoing “witch hunt” against Trump goes beyond a simple political battle.

At one point, a reporter seemed to reference Smith’s accusation that Trump intentionally lied about the 2020 presidential election results and took actions based on those alleged falsehoods. Habba argued that the former president had the right to raise concerns about the election’s flaws and firmly believed that the election had been fraudulent.

“So, what is it that he did to try and switch the votes that you refer to? By bringing cases, by using the law in an appropriate manner unlike what we’re seeing here today? This is not appropriate. What President Trump did, is he said, ‘go patriotically and peacefully protest.’ That is an American right. That is why we are America, and we are not a third-world country, although today, I don’t feel very much like we are in America,” Habba said.

Habba also noted that Smith “opened himself up to a can of worms” because now he has the high bar of proving that Trump intentionally lied.


A different reporter mentioned that former Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton and Stacey Abrams, a former Democratic Georgia gubernatorial candidate, also questioned the results of the elections they lost. In response, Habba pointed out that there seemed to be no consequences for election denial, except when the person in question is named Trump.

“But if your last name is Trump, it’s very different. So Hillary Clinton could have a problem when she lost the election, and we could have a complete liberal meltdown, as we all saw. But when we have dignified disagreements, we take them to court, we say do things patriotically and peacefully,” Habba said.

“Frankly, folks, this is not about that. This is about politics, this is about 2024. Period, the end,” she concluded.

Habba spoke to Newsmax TV Wednesday evening ahead of a Thursday court appearance by Trump in the nation’s capital Thursday afternoon before U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, an Obama appointee who has a reputation for handing down harsher-than-usual punishments to Jan. 6 protesters who have appeared in her courtroom.

Host Rob Schmitt first played a clip featuring former federal prosecutor Joe diGenova, who predicted that the combination of Chutkan, a Democrat-dominant jury pool, and Trump’s political affiliation as a Republican would ensure he is convicted.

“I don’t necessarily believe that, and maybe that’s only because I’m a product of a little bit more internal knowledge,” Habba told Schmitt. “I’m not as concerned based on the facts [of the case]. Am I concerned about a D.C. jury? Of course, nobody can get in front of a D.C. jury as a Republican.”

“There are processes that we can go through if we do believe that this judge is compromised or won’t be able to give a fair shake,” Habba said. “It’s a motion for recusal.

“The only issue with recusal motions — and I’m not familiar with the criminal court system — but in civil law, the judge decides whether they can be impartial … so, we’ll see how it works. I’ll leave that to our criminal attorneys, but that’s typically what you do,” she said.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *