I'm genuinely surprised still bc they couldn't indict someone who threw a ham sandwich. DC must no longer be bothered by the sight of the national guard...

Chewbacca defense

Nonsensical diversionary legal defense

In a jury trial, the Chewbacca defense is a legal strategy in which a criminal defense lawyer tries to confuse the jury rather than refute the case of the prosecutor. It is an intentional distraction or obfuscation. As a Chewbacca defense distracts and misleads, it is an example of a red herring. It is also an example of an irrelevant conclusion, a type of informal fallacy in which one making an argument fails to address the issue in question.^[1][2]^ Often an opposing counsel can legally object to such arguments by declaring them irrelevant, character evidence, or argumentative.

Johnnie Cochran uses the Chewbacca defense against Chef in the South Park episode "Chef Aid".

The name "Chewbacca defense" comes from "Chef Aid", an episode of the American animated series South Park.^[3]^ The episode, which premiered on October 7, 1998, satirizes the O. J. Simpson murder trial, particularly attorney Johnnie Cochran's closing argument for the defense. In the episode, a fictionalized version of Cochran bases his argument on a false premise about the 1983 film Return of the Jedi. He asks the jury why a Wookiee like Chewbacca would want to live on Endor with the much smaller Ewoks when "it does not make sense". He argues that if Chewbacca living on Endor does not make sense—and if even mentioning Chewbacca in the case does not make sense—then the jury must acquit.

Does the government vote to indict, or does a grand jury? Simple question.