Grand Juries protect the rights of the accused.

"Let's recap.

* Bill Clinton kept audio tapes that contained national security information in his sock drawer. In 2012 an Obama-appointed Judge out of the DC circuit ruled that he had the right to have them.

* Barack Obama kept classified documents in an abandoned warehouse.

* Hillary Clinton kept classified documents on a private server

* Mike Pence admitted to having classified material

None of these people were indicted. The fact that Trump was, violates his 1st amendment rights. You can't indict someone via selective prosecution with the goal of suppressing his right to free speech, right to assemble, or right to associate, aka run for office. If a President having possession and personal custody of information related to national security is a crime, which this indictment alleges, then every President would need to be indicted. Fact that only Trump has been indicted for doing the same thing others have done, the DOJ is using selective prosecution to target him, which violates his 1st amendment rights.

The DOJ violated Trump's 4th amendment right when they pierced his right to attorney-client privilege by using a corrupt D.C. Judge to force Trump's lawyers to testify against him.

Lastly, there should never have been a Grand Jury appointed in D.C. being that the case will be heard in FL. You can't go fishing for which Grand Jury may indict someone. But the DOJ didn't want the U.S. Attorney's Office in the Southern District of FL to have access to the case. They didn't want the Grand Jury in FL to go awol and have control of the case. Most importantly, they didn't want Judge Cannon in FL to preside over the breach of attorney-client privilege concerning the D.C. Grand Jury subpoenas in the case.

They misused and abused a Grand Jury (D.C.) that did not have venue over the case in order to manipulate judicial selection, which is a violation of the Grand Jury clause, violation of the Venue Clause, and a violation of the 5th & 6th Amendment rights to due process."

Very well stated. The hypocrisy is clear to all but the most blindly partisan

Pretty much everybody that goes before a grand jury gets indicted. If you used the same contrived probable cause concerning post-presidency documents with any other president in history, every president would also be indicted. Leftists are setting a really stupid precedent here and dishonoring the office of the presidency, just as they dishonored the office with the bogus impeachments.

deflect detected, is that his best defense?
I tried that in traffic court, told the judge everyone around me was speeding. I paid the fine.

You actually broke the law

so were all the other speeders around me, WAHHHH i was singled out because im a dem... wahhhh not fair, WITCH HUNT, fake news,fake judge, fake police, i was set up, i never did it, alt news, give me money to prove the facts... i loves me those maggat tears too!

Um...that was the point...🤔

Grand Juries are chosen from the registered voters for communities in which the alleged crime occurred. Since Republicans outnumber Democrats 37%-33% with "Independents," accounting for 30% an indictment should not be the slam dunk you infer. Having served on a couple of juries, I have put aside my first impressions and convinced a couple of like-minded people to vote with me to find a guy not guilty, who my "gut," told me did the crime. The D.A. did not prove his case "beyond a reasonable doubt." The Special Counsel's case appears to be strong enough to convince 23-citizens in Florda that he should stand accused. This is unlike Impeachments, where decisions are based to a great degree on political alignments.

I've served on a grand jury. This is an idiotic precedent being set to indict an American President for procedural hogwash. It may very well come back to bite the crooked feds responsible.