Fox News legal analyst Jonathan Turley on Tuesday unveiled the challenge of special counsel Jack Smith’s potential indictment of former President Donald Trump.

President Trump announced on Tuesday that he received a letter from Smith on Sunday. President Trump said he was the subject of a grand jury investigation on Jan. 6 and had a very short four-day window to report to the grand jury, which almost always means arrest and indictment. ‘ said.

Fox News host Sandra Smith asked Turley if President Trump was “getting the point across about the timing of all this in the letter.”

“Prosecutors don’t always give their targets enough time. I mean, going before a grand jury is really stupid,” Turley said.

“You are not allowed to be a lawyer. Get up and talk to me.” They rarely answer. I do that because they are in front of 23 people and I want to convince them of something. But most defendants don’t go to a grand jury. ” (Related: ‘You Can Clap’: ‘The View’ co-host gets excited about possible Trump indictment)

Smith then referred to comments made by presidential candidate Asa Hutchinson, who said President Trump should suspend the presidential campaign in view of potential indictments.

“There’s no legal reason why you have to do that. There may be no political reason,” Turley said.

“Each of these indictments seems to have him in the polls. It fulfills his narrative that the weaponization of the criminal justice system exists. If it ever does, it could be very important.At Mar-a-Lago, these were the classic type of charging, a classically constructed case. needs to be firmly grounded in such a way that no one, or even most people, will question it, and that will require very direct and strong evidence. So if Smith doesn’t have such evidence and he’s going big with his speech, I think he’ll be fulfilling the Donald Trump story. He will be the federal version of Alvin Bragg in carrying out that indictment.”

“Smith has a reputation for expanding criminal law,” Turley continued. “Sometimes it’s too far away. This is not the opportunity for that. If you’re going to indict a former president on January 6th, you’re going to need a lot of evidence to show he didn’t just make a political speech. In my view, Donald Trump’s speech is…fully protected under the Brandenburg Act and a lawsuit called the First Amendment to the U.S. Smith needs more than that speech. “

President Trump was recently indicted on 37 counts of mishandling classified documents. Mr Trump has pleaded not guilty to all charges.

Trump was also indicted by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg in connection with former attorney Michael Cohen, who is suspected of paying former porn star Stormy Daniels $130,000 in hush money. .