Massive Backfire - NY AG Letitia James Rocked by The News

Massive Backfire - NY AG Letitia James Rocked by The News

Renowned pollster Frank Luntz recently voiced concerns over the possible political repercussions of actions taken by New York Attorney General Letitia James against former President Donald Trump, particularly regarding the seizure of Trump's assets.

Speaking with CNN's John Berman, Luntz highlighted the potential boost in Trump's popularity should such events transpire. He suggested that Trump would likely frame these legal challenges as evidence of a widespread conspiracy by the federal government, the so-called Washington "swamp," and attorneys general nationwide to prevent his return to the presidency.

This narrative, Luntz argued, could resonate with voters, potentially increasing Trump's chances in the 2024 presidential race.

Luntz emphasized the dramatic effect of asset seizure on Trump's public image and campaign, predicting a surge in sympathy and support that could cast him as the most significant victim in the 2024 political landscape.

He cautioned against underestimating the impact of such legal actions on Trump's electoral prospects, noting past instances where Trump's polling numbers rose following indictments.

He also critiqued the approach taken by opposition figures and entities towards Trump, questioning how, despite numerous indictments and amidst improving economic conditions, Trump continues to outpace President Joe Biden in polls, especially in key swing states.

Luntz's analysis extends to the peculiar situation Trump finds himself in regarding the hefty financial penalty levied against him in a civil fraud case, which Professor Jonathan Turley of George Washington University Law School criticized as bordering on "mob justice."

Turley, in his appearance on Fox News, lambasted the unprecedented $454 million fine imposed on Trump, pointing out the legal quagmire

Trump faces, unable to appeal the decision without first fulfilling the colossal payment requirement. Turley condemned this as a perverse judicial maneuver, effectively sidelining Trump from seeking a fair review of the case.

He called for judicial intervention to address what he sees as an excessive and punitive measure, reflective of a biased campaign against Trump by certain legal authorities.

In sum, Luntz and Turley outline a scenario where legal battles against Trump could paradoxically bolster his political standing, framing these actions as potentially misguided efforts that may inadvertently rally support for Trump among voters.

Subscribe to Conservative Patriots

Don’t miss out on the latest issues. Sign up now to get access to the library of members-only issues.