Really? Most analysts surmise the motive behind Chris Christie’s candidacy is taking down Donald Trump. Up until now, Nikki Haley has almost exclusively taken aim at Ron DeSantis and remained out of the Trump fray. For the last couple of months, it had looked as though Haley had adopted Ted Cruz’ 2015 strategy to remain in the good graces of MAGA and hope to eventually inherit it when Trump stumbled.

Not today, although Haley does wisely form this as a conditional. Is this the first time Haley has gone directly at Trump? It sure seems like it:

Former UN Ambassador and Trump appointee Nikki Haley criticizes Trump over indictment.

”If … true President Trump was incredibly reckless with our national security.“ – ”puts all of our military …in danger“ on FoxNews.

Haley‘s chances of GOP nomination would rise if Trump out pic.twitter.com/3TcZ4IiqUg

— Michaela Kuefner (@MKuefner) June 12, 2023

Two things can be true at the same time. One, the DOJ and FBI have lost all credibility with the American people. And getting rid of just senior management isn’t gonna be enough to fix this. This is gonna take a complete overhaul and we have to do that.

Two, the second thing can also be true. If this indictment is true, if what it says is actually the case, President Trump was incredibly reckless with our national security. More than that, I’m a military spouse. My husband’s about to deploy this weekend. This puts all of our military men and women in danger if you’re going to talk about what our military is capable of or how we would about invading or doing something with one of our enemies. And if that’s the case, it’s reckless, it’s frustrating, and it causes problems.

Yes, and that’s why we have laws to prevent such recklessness. That’s quite a change since Friday, when the indictment finally got published:

This is not how justice should be pursued in our country.

The American people are exhausted by the prosecutorial overreach, double standards, and vendetta politics.

It’s time to move beyond the endless drama and distractions.

— Nikki Haley (@NikkiHaley) June 9, 2023

Even NBC News was somewhat stunned by this turnaround:

WATCH: Nikki Haley says if the Trump indictment is true, then he was "incredibly reckless" w/ national security.@DaniellaMicaela: "This is a break for Nikki Haley, but it also is a break from what we're seeing from the majority of Republicans … a lot of them defending him." pic.twitter.com/jEAOUCH6N2

— Meet the Press (@MeetThePress) June 12, 2023

In fairness, Haley’s not the only one changing tunes after reading through the indictment. Alan Dershowitz has taken the same journey over the last three days, and he once represented Trump in an impeachment trial. On Friday, Dershowitz called the indictment “The Most Dangerous Indictment in History,” but by this morning Dershowitz offered a new take:

The reason this recording is so powerful is that it is self-proving. It doesn’t rely on testimony by flipped witnesses or antagonists of Mr. Trump. It is the kind of evidence every defense lawyer dreads and every prosecutor dreams about. This is particularly important because an appellate court could find legal error in the ruling that Mr. Trump had vitiated attorney-client confidentiality and reverse convictions based on his lawyers’ compelled testimony. A conviction that rests on a consensually recorded conversation would be harder to challenge.

Mr. Smith has made a stronger case against Mr. Trump than many observers, including me, expected. The question remains: Is it strong enough to justify an indictment of the leading candidate to challenge the president in next year’s election?

And this afternoon, Dershowitz backtracked a bit by arguing that both Trump and the prosecutors could be guilty. It’s easy to criticize this, but it’s actually more rational than it looks. The scope and breadth of the indictment and the recklessness of the actions prosecutors allege has forced some reconsideration of the stakes in the issue.

Nevertheless, it is absolutely fair to argue, as both Haley and Dersh do, that the clear double standard applied to Trump and Hillary Clinton undermine the credibility of the DoJ when it comes to 18 USC 793 and the obstruction charges, as well as the moribund investigation into Hunter Biden. Not to mention the eight years spent by the DoJ trying to “get” Trump, which included a made-up “Russia collusion” allegation based on Clinton’s attempt to divert attention away from her own scandal.

After all that, no one can gripe about Trump’s allies erring on the side of skepticism and pointing out the extremely rotten track record at the DoJ. With that track record in place, the conditional isn’t just a pro forma necessity, but a requirement. Even as I try to analyze the legal issues around various counter-claims, I get that point. The selective prosecution/double standard issue is a political rather than legal argument, but it’s entirely valid.

What makes this of interest is who’s speaking up. I would have expected Haley to be the last significant Republican primary candidate to speak out, not one of the first. Christie got out in the lead on Friday, but attacking Trump was explicitly Christie’s game plan. Haley’s strategy seemed to be to aim at the highest-ranking second-place candidate and promote herself while avoiding frontal attacks on Trump. At times, Haley seemed more interested in auditioning for the second slot on a Trump ticket rather than challenging him for the first position. Even Ron DeSantis is still keeping his powder dry so far, even though Trump has been unleashing all sorts of personal attacks and smears against him for weeks.

If Haley feels it necessary to take on Trump directly, that may signal a new phase of the primary. And perhaps a more healthy phase, at least in terms of getting to an honest debate, because the prime issue in this cycle for the GOP is whether to change directions. If not, then Trump is the obvious choice for the nomination. If a change in direction is needed, then it requires bypassing Trump, who clearly is incapable of changing his approach. Only then do we get to the next question as to who the best candidate for that change would be. Candidates who avoid challenging Trump undermine their own case for the nomination, and it shouldn’t have taken an indictment to get that point across.

Welcome to the primary, Ambassador.

Also, the latest episode of The Ed Morrissey Show podcast is now up! Today’s show features:

• Will Ireland impose the kind of speech restrictions on itself as the English did for centuries?
• The Pipeline’s Michael Walsh splits his time between the US and County Clare, and he has grave concerns about a new “hate speech” law promulgated by the Irish republic.
• We also talk about the insanity of Ireland’s decision to destroy 10% of its cattle over climate-change fears, the issues facing the Irish language, and discuss the American political scene as well!

The Ed Morrissey Show is now a fully downloadable and streamable show at  Spotify, Apple Podcasts, the TEMS Podcast YouTube channel, and on Rumble and our own in-house portal at the #TEMS page!