@downsizer
I just had a really fascinating conversation with a friend from university who studied US law and works as a legal consultant for foreign companies doing business over there. I asked him to break the trial down for me and give his opinion.
What I took away from that conversation is that what Trump did may have been morally reprehensible, but not illegal. They really stretched the limits of the term of election financing, particularly since the prosecution wasn't able to disprove other possible motivs (such as Trump paying hush money to save his marriage). An unbiased court should have no trouble overturning this conviction.
What I don't buy, though, is the claim made by some that this was a White House-ordered hit job. For a very simple reason: It would have been a colossal political blunder, both strategically and tactically. Biden and his advisors cannot possibly have wanted to initiate that trial. They can't possibly want to run against any other candidate than Trump. And they can't want those who disapproved of January 6 to think that the Democrats are just as prone to cheating and discrediting the fair election process as Trump is.
Plus, if anything, this conviction has galvanised support for Trump. No, this isn't a plan that a person with half a brain would hatch. It rather seems to me that this was a personal vendetta of sorts (like by those foul-mouthed FBI agents), or a career plan on the prosecution's part. I wouldn't be surprised if Vance or Bragg were to announce their running for governorship or the presidency a couple of years from now.