From New York Times, I'm Micah Bavaro. This is Adelaide.

To win a conviction against Donald Trump for trying to subvert the 2020 election, Special

Council Jack Smith is applying laws in ways they've never been used before.

My colleague, Charlie Savage, has been studying last week's indictment to better understand

Smith's legal strategy, and the ways that Trump may try to counter it.

It's Tuesday, August 8th.

Charlie, welcome back. We like to turn to you as the Times in-house legal mind after

indictments because you make sense of them.

Well, thank you. It's lovely to be back.

I want to start by talking about the legal strategy behind this latest indictment of

former President Trump and its strengths and its weaknesses.

And when this indictment came out last week, the first thing we all noticed about it was

how it was structured. Just to remind listeners, it does not this indictment lay out a bunch

of charges and then evidence that would back up those charges. Instead, it just tells

one big long story about what Trump did in his efforts, eventually, to overturn the

election and says, trust us. This grand story means he committed all these alleged crimes.

So I want to start there. What that structure tells us about the legal strategy behind this

indictment?

So I do think that we can infer some insights into what strategy Jack Smith is developing

here from the structure of this indictment. You're right that it is not the standard

indictment where you have a few discrete actions and then that's attached to one charge

and then there's some different actions and that's attached to a different charge.

...