Trump Conviction is a Win for Justice and Democracy
Donald Trump’s conviction on 34 felony counts was a victory for democracy and the rule of law. Judge Juan Merchan conducted a fair trial, and justice was served, despite the defendant’s immense political power and wealth. The judicial system worked and showed that no one, not even Donald Trump, is above the law.
But many Republican leaders have a big problem with that.
We don’t know if the verdict will help Joe Biden in the presidential campaign, but it might persuade some independent voters to vote against Trump. That is why Trump and his minions in Congress are ferociously attacking the judge, the verdict and the judicial process itself. They are deeply worried that a significant number of undecided voters will not feel comfortable supporting a convicted felon. That could affect the result of a close race, since under our bizarre system a candidate can win all of a state’s electoral votes with only a tiny margin.
President Joe Biden and other Democratic leaders should come out swinging on this issue. They must counter Trump’s lies about the case and Republicans’ propaganda campaign against our legal system. This battle is not just about the election. This is about preserving Americans’ faith in our judicial system, one of the bedrocks of our democracy, and upholding the rule of law.
An Important Case, not a “Flimsy One”
Many commentators have criticized Alvin Bragg, the Manhattan District Attorney, for even bringing the case to trial. After the jury delivered a unanimous verdict, Bret Stephens, a conservative columnist for the New York Times, dismissed the case as “flimsy”. (Stephens is not a lawyer).
Even liberal pundits have engaged in handwringing, lamenting that this case was not as “important” as the three other lawsuits that Trump faces. Those proceedings focus on the former President’s:
Attempts to instigate an insurrection and overturn the election results on January 6
Maneuvers to falsify the election results in Georgia
Purloining classified documents and refusing to return them to government officials
Those lawsuits address extremely dangerous acts by Trump. However, we should not fall into the traps of relativism or dismissing the underlying actions in the New York case as “mere misdemeanors”. Trump’s behavior was not just sordid; it was a criminal attempt to interfere with the election, by depriving voters of important information.
Cooking the Books to Stave Off Disaster
After all, we have known the main facts for years. The context is crucial. Near the end of the 2016 campaign, the “Access Hollywood” tapes were released, and Trump was caught saying that he could grab women “by the pussy”. Trump and his campaign advisers were deeply worried that the tapes would cost him a lot of votes, in a race that was very tight.
When Stormy Daniels threatened to go public with her tale of a one-night stand with Trump, the campaign feared that another damaging revelation could deal a fatal blow to his candidacy. Trump, Michael Cohen and Allen Weisselberg, the Trump Organization’s Chief Financial Officer, devised an elaborate scheme to bury the story and cook the Trump Organization’s books, so they could hide the payments that Cohen made to defuse the threat. Cohen paid Daniels a considerable amount, $130,000, to suppress her story.
Their goal was clear: to prevent voters from learning about Trump’s dalliance with the porn star before the election took place.
Bragg’s Creative Legal Theory
Some commentators argue that Bragg took too creative an approach in framing the case, to elevate Trump’s behavior to felonies from misdemeanors. Falsifying business records is a misdemeanor under New York law, unless the prosecution can show that the defendant did so because he intended to commit another crime. In this instance, Bragg’s team argued that Trump caused the business records to be falsified so he could interfere with the conduct of the Presidential election…which is a federal matter.
So here’s a possible weakness in the case: why should New York prosecutors be able to upgrade a crime based on a violation of federal election laws? Would that be grounds for overturning the conviction on appeal?
We will leave that issue to the specialists (I never practiced criminal law). However, after listening to several experts discuss this issue in different forums, my impression is that 1) they consider it a good example of creative legal thinking and 2) they think that winning on appeal is a very long shot for Trump.
The members of the jury certainly found the prosecution’s arguments persuasive, since they rendered a unanimous verdict.
Donald Trump At Post-Verdict Press Conference/Getty Images
Trump: Trial Was “Rigged”
Donald Trump attacked Judge Merchan as “highly conflicted” and “corrupt”, in his press conference the day after the trial concluded. Trump complained that the trial was “a disgrace” and “rigged”.
I had two reactions to Trump’s rambling and at times baffling remarks:
The sheer volume of lies was astounding
If Trump performs like this in his debate with Biden, he’s in trouble
One would expect Trump to disparage the legal process and loudly proclaim his innocence, of course. He has sung the same song after losing two other cases in New York, the defamation lawsuit brought by E. Jean Carroll and the litigation on accounting fraud initiated by Letitia James, the Attorney General for New York State.
Rallying Around Their Don
What’s different this time is that other Republican leaders have launched a vicious, coordinated assault on the court system. The Republicans could have followed Melania Trump’s example: Trump’s wife did not attend the trial or comment on the proceedings.
Instead, Republican leaders showed up at the courthouse en masse to show their loyalty to Trump. Many of them even imitated Trump’s style, wearing long red ties. They reminded me of medieval courtiers bowing to their king.
This was all highly unusual. Elected officials avoid being associated with politicians under indictment. For example, you don’t see Democrats hanging out with Bob Menendez, the New Jersey Senator accused of taking bribes.
Furthermore, the Republicans have crossed a very dangerous line, attacking the legitimacy of the verdict and the judicial process itself. They have asserted, without any evidence, that the Biden Administration was involved in the New York criminal trial and that Bragg’s prosecution was politically motivated.
Republican Rabid Response Team
The sweeping attacks on the New York verdict have come from a broad array of Republican leaders and prominent politicians including House Speaker Mike Johnson, Sen. Ted Cruz and Sen. Marco Rubio. Their remarks often verge on hysterical.
Sen. Rubio has run an ad that likens the New York case to the show trials that took place after Fidel Castro seized power in Cuba. These sham proceedings were used to justify the executions of the defendants by firing squad, which often took place immediately after the “trial”.
Sen. Cruz has called the decision “an absolute travesty of justice” and “the kind of thing you see in banana republics." Cruz is implying that the judge was corrupt and the outcome was determined by politics. In fact, mainstream commentators have remarked on how fair and efficient the trial was.
Calling on the Supreme Court for Help
Speaker Johnson has argued that the Supreme Court should intervene in the case:
“I think that the justices on the court—I know many of them personally—I think they’re deeply concerned. I think they’ll set this straight, but it’s going to take a while.”
This is a preposterous statement, for several reasons. Trump has the right to appeal the verdict, but to a state appellate court and then to the Court of Appeals, New York’s highest court. There are no grounds for the U.S. Supreme Court to interfere in a New York State court proceeding, unless the case presents a pressing constitutional issue. And as the House leader, Johnson should be especially careful to respect the division of powers between the legislative branch and the judicial branch.
Here's another troubling aspect: Johnson may have said the quiet part out loud, by indicating that his pals on the Court would like to help Trump…as they did so egregiously by stalling the Department of Justice’s lawsuit regarding the January 6 insurrection.
Johnson has also vowed to undertake a three-pronged attack on the Justice Department in supposed retaliation for the New York verdict. The plan includes using the appropriations process, legislation brought to the floor and Congress’s oversight authority to take on the Justice Department. As part of the plan, Rep. Jim Jordan wants to interrogate Alvin Bragg and cut funding for the FBI and other Justice units.
Here's the rub: the Biden Administration and the DOJ were not involved in the New York case.
Johnson, Cruz and Rubio are all lawyers. They know that they are spouting dangerous nonsense.
House Speaker Mike Johnson/Getty Images
The Deeper Threat
The Republicans’ attack on the legal system follows a pattern of antidemocratic behavior. Deliberately or not, they are aiding and abetting Trump as he follows the autocrat’s playbook for gaining absolute power:
Attack the free press as “the enemy of the people” (Stalin’s phrase)
Undermine the legitimacy of elections, the basis of any democracy
Dismantle the "deep state"--government agencies like the DOJ, FBI, and CIA
Sabotage the judicial system by calling it political and corrupt
The Trump team has studied the techniques used by strongmen such as Vladimir Putin, President Viktor Orban of Hungary, and Turkish President Recep Erdogan, who coined the term “the deep state”. The goal is to weaken or destroy any institutions that could limit Trump’s power in a second term. In other words, to get rid of the guardrails that protect our democracy.
Democrats Must Win the Information War
Democrats should not get depressed because the MAGA base is all fired up by the verdict and Trump has quickly raised $34 million. To update his infamous boast, Trump would probably not lose any followers if he shot—and killed—Judge Merchan. Many if not most MAGA types have a profound disdain for our democratic institutions. They do not seem to care about traditional values such as honesty and integrity in politicians.
President Joe Biden, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, and other, non-New York Democratic leaders should go on the offensive. They should not shy away from the verdict or just mutter platitudes about respecting the jury process. This is an information war, and the Democrats must win it.
Democrats must focus on persuading independent voters that Trump is simply not fit for office. They must refute the Republicans’ assault on the judicial process and the rule of law.
A Debate Script for Biden
The Presidential debate on June 27 will give Biden an excellent platform to counter the Republicans’ lies and distortions about Trump’s lawsuits.
Biden should hammer home several key points during the debate, following a script along these lines:
“No one in my Administration has been involved in the New York case.”
“I have not weaponized the DOJ; I have not been involved in any case the DOJ has brought against Trump.”
“We cannot tolerate these attacks upon our judicial system, which is overwhelmingly fair and impartial; we are NOT a banana republic. “
“Donald Trump has lost several lawsuits, which have shown that he is not fit to be your President. He does not have honesty or integrity. “
“Trump sexually assaulted a woman, E. Jean Carroll. Trump lied about it and then he defamed her. A court ordered him to pay her $83 million in damages.”
“Another court ruled that Trump and his company engaged in a massive accounting fraud. They must pay a $450 million fine.”
“Trump concocted a scheme to bury Stormy Daniels’ story, so that voters would not hear about it. He wanted to keep you in the dark. Trump and his minions then hid the payments, disguising them as ‘legal expenses.’ That’s not just shady; he violated the law. A jury of 12 ordinary Americans decided unanimously that Trump had committed felonies…34 of them, in fact. “
“Folks, would you want a convicted felon to run the company where you work?“
Let’s hope that in November, most voters decide that they do not want a crook running our country. The Presidency was not designed for felons.
The Wall Street Democrat