The Patriot Post® · The Lawfare Scorecard

We’re now well past the point that any cogent American voter could believe that the barrage of legal actions against former president and 2024 presidential candidate Donald Trump is actually about justice. The blitz targeting Trump includes six separate civil and criminal cases, charges of 91 felonies, the potential for hundreds of years of prison sentences, and crippling financial penalties.

Trump’s alleged offenses vary widely and happened years (and, in one case, decades) ago. The legal actions have all been timed to hit the airwaves and TV screens during the heart of the 2024 presidential election season, with the obvious intent to derail his prospects for return to the White House.

No doubt some consider that a noble objective — except for the sticky detail that it’s the job of the electorate to make that call, not political incumbents trying to stay in power. Remind me, please: Which party is being accused of threatening American democracy?

Is it working? So far, the civil suits are exceeding the expectations of the Trump destroyers.

Columnist E. Jean Carroll convinced a Manhattan jury that Trump sexually assaulted her decades ago. She couldn’t remember the date or even the year, but she was sure it happened in the Bergdorf-Goodman dressing room. She won $5 million in defamation damages. When Trump squawked publicly, she sued again for defamation of character, for which a different Manhattan jury awarded her an additional $83 million.

A month later, New York State Attorney General Letitia James, who’d run for that office on the promise that she would “get Trump,” hit the real jackpot. Her civil suit accused Trump of fraud in overstating his wealth in loan applications. The ultra-receptive liberal judge hearing the case (no jury required) issued a summary judgment confirming that the fraud happened — effectively finding Trump guilty of fraud without his defrauding anyone — and decided on a staggering penalty of nearly half a billion dollars and imposing major constraints on the operation of the Trump family business.

It gets uglier. As of this writing, Trump is finding it impossible to post the bond required for appeal (where does one go to borrow $464 million?), and now James is threatening to seize his assets.

Meanwhile, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg dredged up an eight-year-old allegation that Trump’s acknowledged hush money payment to porn star Stormy Daniels was improperly treated as a business expense rather than a 2016 campaign contribution — a charge that was examined and dropped years ago by federal prosecutors in NYC. For what would normally be a misdemeanor bookkeeping offense, the indictment won by Bragg ratchets up to 34 felonies.

There is also Trump’s pending case of mishandling classified documents. While the allegations seem well founded, the case is now notable because Trump’s actions, as charged, were substantially less egregious than those of Joe Biden, whom DOJ Special Counsel Robert Hur chose not to charge because of Biden’s reduced cognitive capability. Let that sink in: Biden skates while his attorney general prosecutes his election opponent for essentially the same offense.

Among all the legal salvos fired at Donald Trump, only two relate to his disruptive challenges to behavior following the 2020 election: the Georgia and federal election interference cases. In Georgia, Fulton County DA Fani Willis — another self-styled Trump pursuer — has watched her case unravel because of her own misconduct. But its larger weakness is that her indictment characterizes Trump’s and his co-defendants’ efforts to challenge the Georgia election results as a mob-style racketeering enterprise, subject to Georgia’s RICO statutes. Really?

DOJ Special Counsel Jack Smith’s election interference case seems more substantial. It attempts to nail Trump for his role in obstructing the 2020 election certification and the peaceful post-election transfer of power. Notably, the overused — and wildly incorrect — term “insurrection” appears nowhere in his charge.

In my view, if that were the only case against Trump, and if it had been pursued by the DOJ in a timely manner (it took Congress only one day to decide to impeach Trump for the same offense), the voting public might take the Democrats’ “lawfare” at face value. But as part of an orchestrated bombardment, it gets lost in the noise.

The Lawfare Scorecard, in summary:

The civil suits, particularly the bizarre New York State victimless fraud case, have had devastating financial effects on Donald Trump, his sons, and their family business. Unless reversed or greatly diminished on appeal, a single ruling may destroy their family business and affect thousands of New Yorkers — an extraordinary injustice.

On the criminal matters, Trump is again displaying his boundless energy and resilience. The cases are complex and are proving difficult to resolve, but some may make it to the finish line before the November 5 election. Without question, and regardless of the outcome, they are affecting the election.

So far, the obviously politically motivated lawfare seems to be working to Trump’s advantage. However, conviction on even a single charge could throw the election to Biden. And if elected, Trump will surely be deeply engaged in appeals and additional legal proceedings — all of which will unnecessarily get in the way of the nation’s business.

The inescapable reality is that the current administration and its political allies are using the full force of government to destroy Donald Trump politically, financially, and personally. Doing so constitutes unprecedented interference in an American election. If successful, it is likely to open the floodgates of similar improper action by both parties in the future.

Readers, please note: This column is not an endorsement of the Trump candidacy. I’ve made clear in numerous columns that I do not believe he is the right GOP candidate for 2024. But regardless of your views on Trump, no American voter should reward election interference on this scale.

It may be that no one is above the law. But some are intentionally crushed by it.