The Patriot Post® · Is Anyone Above the Law? No, But...
The culmination of the first of the Trump “lawfare” trials marked a frightening new direction for our country.
Make no mistake: My angst is not about Donald Trump or his 2024 presidential election prospects. Every American — left, right, or center and regardless of political affiliation, ethnicity, gender, or age — should be disgusted at what we just saw and very concerned about where it will lead.
The trial and its verdict were an ominous demonstration of what our government, either state or federal, can do to anyone and at any time if it chooses.
Bad government actors can take an alleged misdemeanor five years past its statute of limitations and turn it into 34 felony counts. They can convene a grand jury and convince it to deliver an indictment. They can arrange a trial in a favorable location with a prosecution-friendly jury pool. They can select a biased and conflicted judge who can direct the entire show (an apt term) to its desired conclusion — in effect, side-stepping the constitutional guarantee to every citizen of a fair trial.
Through it all, they can insist that “no one is above the law.” Sure.
And if you think our government will only target big-wig, wealthy presidential candidates, think again. Consider, for example, the plight of the approximately 1,400 Americans arrested for J6 involvement, in many cases for nothing more threatening than being there, and recognize that many of the nearly 1,000 already convicted agreed to a guilty plea as their only way of avoiding the certainty of far more severe punishment should they resist.
Violent protesters, J6 or otherwise, deserve punishment. But many of these defendants are nothing more than convenient bit players in the administration’s J6 “insurrection” narrative. Ah, but don’t forget: no one is above the law.
Here are a few other gloomy observations on the heels of this disgraceful show:
1.) The visceral hatred shown by so many people to our former president and their absolute glee that they “finally got him” are profoundly disturbing. Since 2016, I’ve written dozens of columns critical of Donald Trump, and Trump’s words and actions have provided much to criticize. But it’s not unusual for me to get responses to those columns casually asserting that Trump should have been jailed years ago (for what?).
On the Republican side, we’re already hearing from some who now can’t wait until the Hunter Biden trial in two weeks — as if punishment of that pathetic character will somehow balance the score.
One thing for sure is that this sorry episode will exacerbate the already sky-high partisanship that poisons all aspects of political and social interactions among Americans. We must find a way to turn down the heat.
2.) It is unclear how Trump’s guilty verdict will affect the election. It may give the Biden team the boost they’ve been searching for (their obvious objective in launching this lawfare mess in the first place), or it might electrify and expand the Trump support base. We’ll see.
But it doesn’t matter. What matters is that this nutty indictment and trial, and the others on the way, constitute the most severe election interference in American history. They will affect the 2024 election, they will preclude any possibility that the election will be viewed as fair and transparent (no matter who wins), and they will open the door to more of the election denial that followed the 2020 election.
3.) Perhaps most astonishing is that this first installment of 2024 government lawfare (and probably not unlike the ones to follow) is so blatantly improper — an in-your-face exercise of raw political power by our own government to let us know who’s boss. They make no effort to hide it. It’s almost as if the principals (prosecutors and judge) were performing for their political audience — with a wink, a nod, and a stage whisper (“watch this!”) as they ignore yet another fundamental element of American due process.
The conservative media labels like “show trial” and “kangaroo court” are not far off the mark. Meanwhile, our left-leaning media nod approvingly, pretend to present thoughtful, expert day-by-day analysis, and periodically toss in that tiresome reminder that no one is above the law.
Anyone with a smidgen of objectivity can see this trial for the politically motivated disgrace that it is. (OK, you don’t have to admit it out loud — but you KNOW it’s true.) I won’t bog down this column with my own blow-by-blow criticism, but I’ve been keeping a list — it’s appended to this column.
Recently, my wife and I attended a graduation ceremony at Parris Island, SC, for a company of U.S. Marine Corps recruits who have successfully met the challenges of the famously arduous USMC training. I could not help but wonder if our nation is still living up to its bargain with these young men and women committed to go into harm’s way on our behalf.
On that score, we’ve got a lot of work to do.
Attachment: The Trump trial stacked deck (a partial list):
Ridiculous underlying premise: that 2016 election records were falsified to mislead the voters. But how? Those records are compiled after the election, and voters never see them!
District Attorney DA Alvin Bragg campaigned on the promise to “get” Trump.
The obviously biased and conflicted Judge Juan Merchan clearly should have recused himself but obviously wasn’t about to pass up this golden opportunity for progressive fame. By the way, how did Judge Merchan get the job? He was not in the pool from whom judges are randomly chosen for a case. Somehow, he was selected for the Trump show. By whom?
The wrong venue: Finding 12 open-minded jury members from an ~89% pro-Biden pool is near impossible. The defense’s request for a venue change was rejected.
Gag order: The leading presidential candidate is kept off the campaign trail for six weeks and denied his First Amendment right to express his views on what’s happening.
Timing: The alleged falsification of election records happened in early 2017 but was elevated and prosecuted seven years later, just in time for the 2024 presidential election.
Porn star Stormy Daniels was allowed two days on the stand to offer salacious detail of an alleged tryst in 2006, not pertinent to the case but clearly prejudicial to the defendant.
Judge Merchan refused to allow the defense to call an expert witness (Brad Smith, former chair of the Federal Elections Commission) to testify as to whether or not the Trump team’s recordkeeping regarding Stormy Daniels’ NDA was an election law violation (it was not), directly refuting the entire basis for the indictment.
The prosecution’s star witness is a convicted serial perjurer, given wide latitude by the judge.
Throughout the trial, there was little to no evidence about the defendant’s role (essentially none) in election finance recordkeeping and zero evidence regarding the prosecution’s basis for upgrading a seven-year-old misdemeanor into the current 34 felony counts. The prosecution has the burden of proof on both matters.
Judge Merchan’s jury instruction advised the jury that he would consider their verdict to be unanimous, even if they did not agree on the second crime, which elevated bookkeeping misdemeanor to felony status — a fundamental element in the felony indictment.