X Close

Trump’s conviction is an assault on democracy Yesterday was a darker day than January 6

Trump in court yesterday (Jabin Botsford-Pool/Getty Images)

Trump in court yesterday (Jabin Botsford-Pool/Getty Images)


May 31, 2024   6 mins

Whatever you think of Donald Trump — and I for one think very little of him — his conviction as a felon for what would ordinarily be a minor misdemeanour by a biased jury is a grim day for democracy in America. Yesterday’s decision, the culmination of a vindictive prosecution, was less dramatic than the ransacking of the US Capitol by a pro-Trump mob after the 2020 election — but the long-term ramifications are likely to be far more serious.

Trump, of course, is no angel. In 2020, he attempted to suborn vice-president Mike Pence into delaying the congressional ratification of the election results, and pressured Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, a fellow Republican, into finding enough votes to change the electoral college outcome in his favour in Georgia. In seven other states, Trump’s henchmen also plotted to use fake electors to swing the results. To their credit, Pence, Raffensperger  and other senior Republicans stood up to Trump’s bullying. The rule of law in the United States was put to the test by Donald Trump — and it passed the test.

But now, anti-Trump Democrats have put the rule of law in America to the test again — and this time it has been bent to the point of breaking. In February, a Manhattan jury found Trump guilty of civil fraud in a case involving alleged overstatements of real estate values. And yesterday, following the prosecution of Democratic District Attorney Alvin Bragg, another Manhattan jury found Trump guilty of alleged violations in a case involving the reporting of hush money payments to the porn star Stormy Daniels. It was the first time a sitting or former US president has been convicted of a crime. It was also the first time that the allies of a president of one party have successfully weaponised the American judicial system in an attempt to destroy the presidential candidate of another.

In both of these cases, the partisan motives of the Democratic prosecutors and judges were evident. Campaigning as a Democrat for the office of Attorney General in New York State in 2018, Letitia James promised that she would selectively prosecute Trump, and find some excuse, any excuse, to do so: “I will never be afraid to challenge this illegitimate president,” she said. “I will be shining a bright light into every dark corner of his real estate dealings and every dealing.” The civil fraud case brought against Trump by James was presided over by Judge Arthur Engoron, an elected judge and a Democrat who was elected to the First Judicial District of New York in 2015 without any Republican opponent, so rare are Republicans in New York.

The partisanship of the Democratic officials in the hush-money case has been just as blatant. Charges like those brought against Trump in the hush money case were rejected as too weak by Cyrus Vance, the previous Manhattan district Attorney, and they were also rejected as too flimsy by Vance’s successor, Manhattan’s current DA, Alvin Bragg. Bragg only changed his mind and brought charges against Trump after two things happened. The first was the publication of a book — People vs. Donald Trump: An Inside Account — by Mark Pomerantz, a member of Bragg’s team who resigned in protest in 2022, claiming that Bragg was not doing enough to prosecute Trump. The second was the fact that, by 2023, it was becoming clear that Trump would be the Republican nominee for the presidency.

“The partisanship of the Democratic officials in the hush-money case has been just as blatant.”

In the hush money case, Bragg turned what would ordinarily be a minor misdemeanour involving falsifying records into a felony, by claiming that it was somehow part of a nefarious scheme to interfere in the 2016 election. Yet even eminent legal experts find it hard to explain exactly why Trump was charged: last year, even the Left-wing website Vox described the case’s “legal theory” as “dubious”.

In these two New York cases — and a third case in January, in which Trump was fined an exorbitant $83 million for allegedly defaming E. Jean Carroll after another jury in Democratic Manhattan had found him guilty of sexual abuse, but not rape — the legal theories may have been questionable, but the motivations of the prosecution were obvious. It is difficult not to believe that the purpose of the extraordinarily high fines in the civil fraud case and the defamation case has been to cripple Trump’s presidential campaign against Biden. And the manifest purpose of the conversion of a minor misdemeanour into a felony seems just as clear — to allow Biden and other Democrats to brand Trump as a “convicted felon” between now and the November election, and, if possible, to remove Trump from the campaign trail by jailing him.

Even more disturbing than these kangaroo court trials in one-party Democratic New York is the Espionage Act case against Trump, currently being prosecuted in Florida by Special Counsel Jack Smith. In 2016, all Democratic justices voted with the Republicans on the Supreme Court to overturn Smith’s earlier prosecution of Republican governor Robert McDonnell in a corruption case involving gifts; the unanimous court warned of “the broader legal implications of the Government’s boundless interpretation of the federal bribery statute”.  In spite of — or perhaps because of — his overzealousness as a prosecutor, Smith was appointed by Biden’s Attorney General Merrick Garland, who just happened to have been blocked from a seat on the Supreme Court by the Republican Senate majority in 2016 after then-president Obama nominated him. A minor dispute over the possession of classified documents between ex-president Trump and the bureaucrats of the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) gave Garland a chance to exact personal revenge. In August 2022, Garland authorised an unprecedented raid by FBI agents who, in Trump’s absence, ransacked the Florida home of the ex-president.

Like Trump, Joe Biden kept boxes of classified documents in his home following his term as Barack Obama’s vice-president. And like Trump, Biden was investigated by a special counsel appointed by Merrick Garland, Robert Hur. But Hur refused to press charges under the Espionage Act against Biden on the grounds that he is “an elderly man with a poor memory”. In stark and disturbing contrast, Smith issued a 37-count indictment against Trump, with most of the charges being based on the Espionage Act of 1917.

From the very beginning, the Espionage Act — a vague, sinister law passed by Congress in a fit of hysteria during the First World War — has been abused by presidents against opposition politicians and journalists. President Woodrow Wilson’s Democratic administration used it to give his Socialist presidential rival, Eugene Debs, a 10-year prison term in 1919. In the same year, Victor Berger, a Socialist member of the House of Representatives, was also convicted under the legislation. In spite of winning an election, Berger was denied his seat in Congress and disqualified from public office under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment, an irrelevant clause designed to prevent ex-Confederate insurrectionists from regaining power after the Civil War. Ironically, this is the same archaic provision that was weaponised recently by Democratic officials in Colorado, Maine and Illinois, who sought to disqualify Trump from appearing on Republican primary ballots in those states, before a unanimous Supreme Court in 2024 ruled against such efforts.

Having run for President in 1920 from behind bars, Eugene Debs was pardoned by Republican president Warren G. Harding in 1921, while Berger’s conviction was also overturned in the same year. In a similar vein, we can hope that enlightened state or federal courts will overturn the unjust convictions of Trump. But whether or not that happens, the damage to America’s democracy has largely been done.

In the short run, the corruption of the American legal system by Democrats out to get Trump has  shattered the reputation of New York state as a safe place to live and do business. Yet far worse is the damage to America’s global reputation. Thanks to these Soviet-style show trials, the US can no longer plausibly claim to be a global example of the nonpartisan rule of law and constitutional government. That reputation was already damaged by Trump’s clumsy attempt to overturn the results of the 2020 election. Today, however, thanks to his enemies’ willingness to turn the courts into tools of election interference, that perception that the US is now the world’s largest banana republic has been cemented.

For in the future, by weaponising state law to try to destroy federal candidates and officeholders of the rival party, Democrats have opened a Pandora’s box. It is probably only a matter of time before Republican attorney generals or former Democratic politicians on their own trumped-up charges. And why not? The use of lawfare against Trump has put a target on the back of Democratic politicians. Already some Republicans are calling for prosecutions of James and Bragg under an obscure federal statute against electoral interference. After all, such prosecutions, ruinous as they would be, are more plausible than the cases that those prosecutors have brought against Trump.

In Robert Bolt’s play A Man For All Seasons, Sir Thomas More responds to William Roper’s statement that he would “cut down every law in England” to go after the Devil: “Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned ’round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat?” The Democrats are about to learn a similar lesson: that even the Devil deserves the benefit of the law.


Michael Lind is a columnist at Tablet and a fellow at New America. His latest book is Hell to Pay: How the Suppression of Wages is Destroying America.


Join the discussion


Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber


To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.

Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.

Subscribe
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

212 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Damon Hager
Damon Hager
1 month ago

You’re a banana republic and no longer leader of the free world.
Reapply to join the British Empire. Or something.

D Glover
D Glover
1 month ago
Reply to  Damon Hager

Are you sure that Britain is any better?
Boris and Rishi had cake and wine in the cabinet room, although Rishi won’t have imbibed since he’s teetotal. They got investigated by the Met, and got fixed penalty fines for breaking lockdown regs.
Sir Keir and some mates had curry and beer in a northern Miners’ Institute in a similar breach of lockdown. Both parties had resumed work after the refreshments were over. In Starmer’s example there was no case to answer.
How is this not politicised law?

Katharine Eyre
Katharine Eyre
1 month ago
Reply to  D Glover

The United Banana Kingdom

Citizen Diversity
Citizen Diversity
1 month ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

The United Kingdom is bananas.

JR Stoker
JR Stoker
1 month ago
Reply to  D Glover

Because Starmer and his team had been working together and took a short break for refreshment. Johnson and his team had a party. It’s up to the local police force to make decisions and in this instance they both probably correctly interpreted the law, stupid as it was.

I’m a Johnson supporter, but he made a serious error of judgement here, both in breaking a law he had sponsored, and giving ammunition to his opponents

tom j
tom j
1 month ago
Reply to  JR Stoker

Yes I mean, it’s not as if the Tories had been working together, the Cabinet room is clearly designed purely for socialising.

JR Stoker
JR Stoker
1 month ago
Reply to  tom j

The rules were 6 persons could form a group to work on socialise together. Starmer did, Johnson did not. The location is irrelevant.

Alex Lekas
Alex Lekas
1 month ago
Reply to  JR Stoker

The rules once held that one human being could own another. The rules once held that certain people could not vote or could not marry or could not do things we take for granted today. The first rule of rules is that they have to make sense. When they do not, adherence is not very likely.

Warren Trees
Warren Trees
1 month ago
Reply to  Alex Lekas

Hindsight is always 20/20.

Mike Michaels
Mike Michaels
1 month ago
Reply to  Warren Trees

Plenty knew it at the time.

Jerry Carroll
Jerry Carroll
1 month ago
Reply to  Alex Lekas

Slavery still exists in the Muslim world.

Ellen Evans
Ellen Evans
1 month ago
Reply to  Alex Lekas

The first rule of rules is that they must be applied across the board, or people grow contemptuous of them and feel that, since the game is rigged, the rules need not be respected.

D Glover
D Glover
1 month ago
Reply to  JR Stoker

I’m no fan of Rishi Sunak, but his only crime was to arrive early for a cabinet meeting. He was Chancellor of the Exchequer so this was his workplace. Did he even know that there’d be cake on the table?
Cabinet work would have been done after the birthday cake. How is that different to Starmer’s crowd resuming work after curry?

JR Stoker
JR Stoker
1 month ago
Reply to  D Glover

Numbers, numbers. The rules were ridiculous, but Starmer obeyed them, the Tory gathering didn’t. I quite agree that there are times when laws are oppressive and should be disobeyed. But that becomes a very serious matter when it is reached. Its certainly not worth it for cakes and ale (or prosecco)

Jerry Carroll
Jerry Carroll
1 month ago
Reply to  D Glover

However you slice it, it is either Cakegate or Currygate.

Ethniciodo Rodenydo
Ethniciodo Rodenydo
1 month ago
Reply to  D Glover

You can add to that Rayner’s miraculous escape from prosecution

JR Stoker
JR Stoker
1 month ago

She had committed no offence or breach. She may be a monster but it is the Conservatives who were stupid in blowing the thing up before it was investigated.

And then miss the open goal that she has spoken against sale of council houses but bought, effectively, two herself.

Damon Hager
Damon Hager
1 month ago

Over a supposed £1000 irregularity? I’m no fan of Ms Rayner, but big deal.

Jerry Carroll
Jerry Carroll
1 month ago

Is this commonly known? If not, why not:
Angela Rayner’s son, Ryan ‘Batty’, has starred in multiple porn films on the internet OnlyFans site with his wife, Rayner’s daughter-in-law. The porn account is well-publicised on Instagram & Twitter since 2022. 

Eleanor Barlow
Eleanor Barlow
1 month ago
Reply to  Jerry Carroll

What does this have to do with Angela Rayner? She is only responsible for her own actions, not those of her adult son and daughter-in-law.

General Store
General Store
1 month ago
Reply to  D Glover

Perhaps we could both apply to rejoin the Roman Empire?

McLovin
McLovin
1 month ago
Reply to  General Store

Maybe that latin I learnt at school would come in handy?

Jerry Carroll
Jerry Carroll
1 month ago
Reply to  General Store

It’s run by Italians. You still sure?

Saigon Sally
Saigon Sally
1 month ago
Reply to  D Glover

“had cake and wine…” a crime against good taste? but how pitiful to be dragging this up years later

David Ryan
David Ryan
1 month ago
Reply to  Saigon Sally

A crime against good taste? Not according to Withnail. “What do you want?” “Cake and wine… The finest wines available to humanity. We want them here and we want them now!”

Damon Hager
Damon Hager
1 month ago
Reply to  D Glover

Nobody is suggesting that the UK is perfect, but there’s no comparison with the politicisation of law in the United States.

Walter Marvell
Walter Marvell
1 month ago
Reply to  D Glover

Exactly. And further – who actually were the partygaters who partied in Downing Street’s Partygate Scandal??? It was not Boris and Rishi who danced on the tables and quaffed bottles. They – sorry dupes – attended standard civil service leaving do/farewells and sat im at a meeting with a cake sitting on a desk respectively. It was Sue’s Army; the 30 something civil servants who got the booze trollies and disgraced themselves. But manic non stop BBC propagandizing & the Cummings vendetta transformed the actions of largely progressive young civil servants into cynical law bendingTory politicos pulling V signs to the public. A v dark chapter showing how the total progressive capture of the state media can warp truth. What fools they were not to make use of the legitimate exemptions for a de facto national crisis HQ too!

McLovin
McLovin
1 month ago
Reply to  Damon Hager

The US has 25% of global GDP still; NVIDIA”s market valuation is now greater than the whole of the LSE. The US has 10 nuclear aircraft carriers, and in fact is continuously building one – when the next one is complete they retire the oldest one. That sounds to me like an immensely rich and powerful country to me. Why they can only find geriatrics to lead them is a hard question to answer.
But the truth is they work harder than we do (the British), and they have a more efficient market system – no secret why they are richer than we.

Mangle Tangle
Mangle Tangle
1 month ago
Reply to  McLovin

All that and, of course, they’re big. Scale matters.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 month ago
Reply to  McLovin

If you spend $34,000,000,000,000 you don’t have it’s very easy to appear to be rich! That debt. btw is approx. $100,000 per American man, woman and child or a whopping $300,000 per US household..
With dollar decline, impoverishment of the middle class and inflation still high the US is I economic deep dudu.. we all know people who spend money they don’t have!

McLovin
McLovin
1 month ago
Reply to  Liam O'Mahony

If the US is in deep dudu, what are we in?

Damon Hager
Damon Hager
1 month ago
Reply to  McLovin

“If the US is in deep dudu, what are we in?”
We’re in a place where politicians, bloggers, journalists, businessmen, etc., don’t continually live in dread of malicious prosecution. All in all, I think I’ll stay.

Studio Largo
Studio Largo
1 month ago
Reply to  Damon Hager

What about your MP who recently resigned his seat due to fears of Islamist violence? And the one actually murdered by Islamists? Don’t be naive, the rot is everywhere across the West.

William Edward Henry Appleby
William Edward Henry Appleby
1 month ago
Reply to  McLovin

I’m not sure they do work harder tbh; certainly if my experience of working for US financial organisations is anything to go by. There is more to productivity than being seen at your desk. It is a big country, with lots of resources, a large domestic market, with a single currency, a common language and a ready supply of immigrants, waiting to make their mark. Perhaps those are the characteristics that make a great economy.

Charles Hedges
Charles Hedges
1 month ago
Reply to  McLovin

I would say the USA is more open to new ideas and quicker to implement which maintains momentum of innovation. Britain has innovative people but there are too many who can obstruct , delay and slow down innovation. Speed to market is vital today.

Ellen Evans
Ellen Evans
1 month ago
Reply to  Damon Hager

And precisely how it the British Empire (to the extent that still exists) any better? You’re disintegrating from the inside out, just as we are – and at a faster rate, it seems to me.

Ex Nihilo
Ex Nihilo
1 month ago
Reply to  Damon Hager

“British Empire”. I can hardly speak for laughing so hard! “Leader of the free world” is likely a sobriquet the U.S. has lost but, if so, what country deserves the title? As an American, observing the failure of our political institutions saddens me. However, looking forward, I see a future for us that begins to resemble Mexico City, Buenos Aires, or Rio. For Europeans the future is to become versions of Beruit, Moscow, or Tehran. Maybe banana republic is not the worst after all.

Nell Clover
Nell Clover
1 month ago

The Senate is stuffed with old men and women. The military has been strategically defeated in Afghanistan and now the Middle East. The State Derpartment has spent the last decade actively trying to weaken the economies of its allies. US industry can longer mass produce its weapons of war and new weapons platforms are beset by delays measured in decades. The legal system is now a part of the political system and both obsess about phantom internal enemies.

A gerontocracy. A superpower confounded by far smaller enemies. An imperial power that seeks to weaken its satellite states. An industrial giant with industries that can’t compete abroad. A political establishment fearful of internal enemies using the legal system to squash opponents. The Soviet Union in the 70s and 80s.

The parallels with the last decades of the Soviet Union are astounding. These are hardly the signs of a healthy, strong imperial power.

Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
1 month ago
Reply to  Nell Clover

This does not bode well for any western democracy.

Mark M Breza
Mark M Breza
1 month ago
Reply to  Nell Clover

Either one believes in the USA or
one believes D Trump ?
He turned into Benedict Arnold.

0 0
0 0
1 month ago
Reply to  Mark M Breza

What is “United” about “the USA?” For that matter, IS there a “USA” anymore?

Charles Hedges
Charles Hedges
1 month ago
Reply to  Nell Clover

Sounds like Rome post 350 AD.

Paul Thompson
Paul Thompson
1 month ago

While I agree with much of this, the case about the top-secret documents should be prosecuted. Not only did Trump store these with his typical incompetence, but he bragged about the theft, and used top-secret papers to “impress” party guests.

tom j
tom j
1 month ago
Reply to  Paul Thompson

The article even shows that Biden did the same thing. These are minor matters, not illegal wars of invasion or corruption. This is no way to run a country.

Utter
Utter
1 month ago
Reply to  tom j

For which he immediately apologised and returned the papers – and there is no sign he took them just for kicks.

Steven Carr
Steven Carr
1 month ago
Reply to  Utter

This word ‘immediately’ – it doesn’t mean what you think.
The papers were from Biden’s time as VP – ie up to 2016.
And he apologised in 2023.

Utter
Utter
1 month ago
Reply to  Steven Carr

Immediately after the problem was identified and he was asked to return them. It seems likely that ex-presidents, veeps and and SofS taking home confidential docs after their term may not be that unusual. Only one person tried to cover this up and fight the return, and make pathetic accusations of witch hunts.

Alex Lekas
Alex Lekas
1 month ago
Reply to  Steven Carr

The papers were also from Joe’s time as Senator. In neither case was he authorized to have them. “He apologized.” So what? Would this go away if Trump did likewise?

Micael Gustavsson
Micael Gustavsson
1 month ago
Reply to  Alex Lekas

Trump was asked repeatedly to return them, but did not. Biden complied immediately when asked (by the of course he knew what had happened to Trump)

Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
1 month ago

This is true. Trump can be such an ahole, and legit should be charged with obstruction, but it doesn’t change the facts about actual possession of the documents and that Biden did the same thing, even though he had no protection because he wasn’t president. The facts are they all keep classified documents because everything jn Washington is stamped classified.

Micael Gustavsson
Micael Gustavsson
1 month ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

True

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
1 month ago
Reply to  Utter

Biden took classified documents as a Senator which is illegal….and then he took documents as president which is not necessarily illegal, but at this point he is too daft to know much about anything.

Carlos Danger
Carlos Danger
1 month ago
Reply to  Utter

Joe Biden knowingly kept classified documents for years. The only reason he wasn’t prosecuted was because no jury would convict him. Prosecutorial discretion saved him. That’s all.

Utter
Utter
1 month ago
Reply to  Carlos Danger

….and what is the reason that no jury would convict him? He is not popular.

Carlos Danger
Carlos Danger
1 month ago
Reply to  Utter

The jury would not convict him because he is a senile old man. Or so Robert Hur said.

Donald
Donald
1 month ago
Reply to  tom j

Uh, no. Biden did not do ‘the same thing(s)’. He did not ignore official requests to return the materials, he did not shuffle the papers around his home or stick them behind a shower curtain to try to conceal them from investigators, and he did not reveal their contents to his buddies at the country club. That’s because he has a moral and ethical backbone and his opponent does not.

jack levy
jack levy
1 month ago
Reply to  Donald

This is easily the most dimwitted comment on here.

Utter
Utter
1 month ago
Reply to  jack levy

It is.

JR Stoker
JR Stoker
1 month ago

The US legal system was politicised the minute it was decided to elect judges. Though there are merits to electing judges and police chiefs.

And the jury was biased. But was Mr T guilty, in both cases? Almost certainly

Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
1 month ago
Reply to  JR Stoker

What exactly is he guilty of in this case?

Thomas Wagner
Thomas Wagner
1 month ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

On that, opinions differ. And that’s the problem.

JR Stoker
JR Stoker
1 month ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

He paid a bribe to buy silence, and tried to hide it. That’s a crime. An obvious crime

T Bone
T Bone
1 month ago
Reply to  JR Stoker

He didn’t pay a bribe. Michael Cohen paid off an individual spouting a salacious tabloid rumor and Trump paid Cohen back as a legal expense. This is not uncommon. Even if you believe Cohen (a serial liar) that Trump instructed Cohen him…at most this is a misdemeanor with an expired statute of limitations.

Even if you hate Trump…you can’t just overcharge people because you don’t like them. What kind of petty tyrant are you?

Stephen Kristan
Stephen Kristan
1 month ago
Reply to  JR Stoker

I love the “almost” certainly. Close enough for you, huh? God help the defendant in any trial on which you’re a juror.

JR Stoker
JR Stoker
1 month ago

I said “almost” because I was not in court nor have I read all the evidence, just newspaper reports. You are presuming him innocent, it seems, on the same or maybe less insight.

Why are yiu so supportive of this man? He is ruining the Republican party reputation for good honest government, a gift to the horrible lefties of the Democrat Party. They are short of good leaders, whilst tge Republicans have a number of good potential leaders. If they survive the Trumpian assault on their party

Arthur King
Arthur King
1 month ago
Reply to  JR Stoker

Canada has appointed judges who abuse their power

Simon Templar
Simon Templar
1 month ago

The civil government of any Western nation is built on laws which are supposed to be just. That means they must apply equally to everyone.
Yes, all humans are frail creatures who sin. The laws are not intended to prosecute all sins, otherwise we would all be in jail. Hence, there is distinction: there are misdemeanors in America and there are felonies.
When a political movement decides to destroy its opponent, by casting his sins as felonies, you end up with Trump’s trial for covering up hush money for a sin – a liaison with a prostitute, and making it a felony.
This is from the party who defended Bill Clinton for what he did in the Oval Office with Monica Lewinsky.
But this assault on democracy started in 2020, not on J6 when Trump “clumsily” tried to suspend the transfer of power, but earlier, when he was accused of insurrection for even trying to expose the cheating he was legally justified in believing had taken place. Justice must be overt and clear, otherwise it is not justice. Justice is what lost yesterday.

Tony Price
Tony Price
1 month ago

Trump is now a convicted rapist, convicted fraudster and convicted felon. But if course it’s the justice system that is all so wrong! Could it not be that actually he really is guilty? I sort of followed the cases from over here and it seems entirely plausible that he is guilty in all three cases, and there are more to come in which it also seems entirely plausible that he is guilty, but that doesn’t seem to stop him spreading his lies and poison across the media, and for so many Americans to actually think him worthy of being their leader, despite his statement that he wants to be a “dictator” of the “reich”.

Utter
Utter
1 month ago
Reply to  Tony Price

Trump has an extraordinary ability to dement people – for or against him. It’s quite common effect of sociopaths/narcissists.

Simon Phillips
Simon Phillips
1 month ago
Reply to  Utter

Even to the point of inventing crimes – “convicted rapist”.

Rob Alka
Rob Alka
1 month ago
Reply to  Tony Price

The question is not whether Trump is guilty but instead how trivial and contrived the points of law used by Biden for the overriding reason of ruining or worsening the reputation of Trump to ensure he can’t win.
Do you remember the film “The Ugly American”? The title sequel is surely now just a matter of removing the letter “n”

Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
1 month ago
Reply to  Tony Price

Ugh. More TDS from someone who sorta followed the cases. He was never convicted of rape. He lost a civil case for defamation. The statute of limitations actually expired, but the state of New York granted a one-time exemption. Does this sound normal to you?

John Moss
John Moss
1 month ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

While it’s true he was never convicted of rape in a criminal court, a civil court jury did find him guilty of rape and defamation (twice). He said/she said cases are always questionable. But given the fact that he’s bragged about sexually assaulting women, and given the huge number of women who have accused him of sexual assault, it seems a little rich to assume the system is rigged against him.

Alex Lekas
Alex Lekas
1 month ago
Reply to  John Moss

No, a jury did NOT find him guilty of rape. Not even once. The civil jury found that it was probable that things happened with Jean Carroll, but not rape. And no, he did not brag about assaulting women. He said that women will let rich guys do things that the average man cannot. And he’s right. Just ask any rock star or professional athlete.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 month ago
Reply to  Alex Lekas

That is true, but is it a quality one would want in a president?

Gerry Quinn
Gerry Quinn
1 month ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

Going from history, it is a quality amply exemplified among presidents. Telling the truth about it, not so much.

jack levy
jack levy
1 month ago
Reply to  John Moss

Juanita Broderick has been fighting for her claim of rape by infamous womanizer Bill Clinton for decades, and the system has done nothing. Don’t act like the system is acting appropriately because it’s now Trump.

T Bone
T Bone
1 month ago
Reply to  John Moss

One day you may find yourself in a woke tribunal without any due process or semblance of impartiality. If and when that happens, I hope you remind yourself it’s the system you promoted.

Leslie Smith
Leslie Smith
1 month ago
Reply to  T Bone

Bingo – excellent point.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 month ago
Reply to  T Bone

And the 12 jurors were they all corrupt?

T Bone
T Bone
1 month ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

No not at all. I don’t think you’re corrupt. I just don’t think you’re an open minded person. You see the world through a binary lens of good and evil and pre-determine your enemies based on politics.

This took place in Manhattan. Take a look at the percentage of Democrats in Manhattan. Even if one or two jurors wanted to object, was it really worth it for them personally? Probably not.

Lesley van Reenen
Lesley van Reenen
1 month ago
Reply to  T Bone

And they were instructed by the judge

Charles Hedges
Charles Hedges
1 month ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

He was guilty of being Donald Trump.

Charles Hedges
Charles Hedges
1 month ago
Reply to  John Moss

No-one complained before he entered politcs as a Republican. He was the toast of New York in the 1980s and 1990s.

j watson
j watson
1 month ago

What a partisan load of tosh. He broke the law and a jury found against him.
Cohen went to prison for similar.
No comparison on the Records case between Trump & Biden. Biden didn’t obstruct justice.
The contortions some Trump/MAGA supporters have to pull to justify this Grifter unbelievable.
That said he never sees prison. Either he pardons himself or Biden will post Nov 24.

Addie Shog
Addie Shog
1 month ago
Reply to  j watson

He can’t pardon himself as it wasn’t a Federal case.

Utter
Utter
1 month ago
Reply to  j watson

TDS has two flavours. Many on this site fail to see that.

T Bone
T Bone
1 month ago
Reply to  j watson

What law did he break, dear Watson?

j watson
j watson
1 month ago
Reply to  T Bone

Read the Judges direction to the Jury TB. He’s outlines the law v clearly.
You’d think folks who are interested in this would have checked that out first, but hey you’re in denial and that is a powerful force.

Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
1 month ago
Reply to  j watson

Cohen went to jail for tax fraud – not reporting $4 mill in income. He also made false statements to a federally insured financial institution to obtain a $500,000 home equity loan. The charges for withholding info about hush money payments were tacked on at the end, in an obvious attempt to build a case against Trump.

j watson
j watson
1 month ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

Not so fast JV. He went to jail also for campaign violations.

Simon Templar
Simon Templar
1 month ago
Reply to  j watson

Read the Sixth Amendment. Demands a fair trial; Impartial jury; A clear crime that you are accused of; Presumption of Innocence. The judge’s behavior will not stand inspection by Appeal. He refused to let the defense bring exculpatory evidence. There was never a felony crime brought forward. Throughout the trial the question was “but what is the crime?” The judge told the jury they did not need to agree on one.
Please read up on the case, and you will see this was not “Boo hoo he broke the law.” The NY DA made up a crime to fit the defendant.

j watson
j watson
1 month ago
Reply to  Simon Templar

You obviously read the propaganda before you read, line by line, the Judge’s direction to the Jury where he states clearly what is the law and what they have to find to come to a guilty verdict. It’s v clear.
What is the evidence he didn’t let them bring though our of interest? Given Trump’s missives after each day in Ct I’m intrigued as I don’t recollect him indicating they’d had evidence rejected?

Alex Lekas
Alex Lekas
1 month ago
Reply to  j watson

Biden didn’t obstruct justice. — — Biden was not legally allowed to possess classified documents in the first place, so don’t whitewash what he did. A Senator or VP is not the same as a President. The latter can declassify almost anything; the two former posts have no such authority. Biden had documents he should not have had for years. He broke the law just by possession.

j watson
j watson
1 month ago
Reply to  Alex Lekas

Oh dear another one who fires off before re-reading the point made and grasping the salient issue. Neither Trump, Biden or Clinton are/were allowed to retain classified documents/material. Trump wouldn’t have ended up in legal jeopardy if he’d just given them back. The difference is when it was found each had some only one of the 3 obstructed the return. Yep Trump. That same individual also had sheds more he taken/kept than the other two, and seemed to have discussed some of the contents with those without security clearance.
Presidents can declassify when still President but there is a process for it.
Even some of Trump closest aids in his last year of his Presidency on the record saying this was undefendable obstruction.
But you know you guys got so much invested in this Grifter it’s just too painful for you to see the truth.

Utter
Utter
1 month ago

Republicans, Trump would never stoop so low as to use the courts in politics.

Warren Trees
Warren Trees
1 month ago
Reply to  Utter

He never has, but most certainly will going forward after being elected.

Damon Hager
Damon Hager
1 month ago
Reply to  Warren Trees

Let’s hope he won’t sink to their level.
After all, he threatened to lock Mrs Clinton up. But he didn’t, did he?

Daniel P
Daniel P
1 month ago

I will first say that my gut tells me that this is actually going to give Trump a major boost in fundraising and that he will likely get a bump in the polls.

Second, I suspect that the judge in Manhatten will likely not let Trump stay out on bail while his appeals work through.

Third, I have never been one for conspiracy theories or an evil deep state, but I am now convinced that the deep state exists and that it is conspiring.

Fourth, if Trump wins in November, no matter how large he wins by, the democrats will do everything they can to make sure he does not take office.

Fifth, the US constitution is dead and we are now a banana republic lead by corrupt and incompetent people.

I am a 5th generation veteran from a long line of West Point graduates who have served in every war this country has fought since the Civil War. I have told both my children to not serve. I tell every young person I know not to waste their time serving. Our national command authority will use you as the armed wing of a corrupt system and then fail you when you need them.

I am indifferent to Trump, Trump is not the point, the point is that our government has become the front for a corrupt and morally bankrupt oligarchy, that our constitution has been undermined to the point that it has failed. In that sense, I am not sure we still have a country.

If, you believe as I do, and as Shawn McGuire outlines perfectly in his X post, then either you have to support Trump or you have to concede that the oligarchy, the “elite”, have won. If they can do this to Trump, God help anyone else they decide to target.
https://x.com/shaunmmaguire/status/1796293774794268747

Mangle Tangle
Mangle Tangle
1 month ago
Reply to  Daniel P

The deep state? It exists and has done since the early party of the last century, just when the US was becoming the dominant power. The recent book about the Dulles brothers – The Devil’s Chessboard – is most illuminating. Presidents who win the backing of the deep state (for example, Nixon) know the score upfront. Those who win despite the deep state (arguably Eisenhower) figure it out fast. Those who ‘rebel’ get taken care of (JFK). Trump’s problem is that he won’t listen. He almost certainly was offered the chance to get their support, but the cost (higher defence spending, overseas wars, etc) he rejected. That’s why he’s been targeted. The US has not been a force for good; what empire ever is?

Mark M Breza
Mark M Breza
1 month ago
Reply to  Mangle Tangle

If it is that easy to take over the US
then the system of government
was a failure from the beginning.

Jerry Carroll
Jerry Carroll
1 month ago
Reply to  Mark M Breza

History shows great powers and empires collapse on average after about 250 years, the age the US is right now.

Charles Farrar
Charles Farrar
1 month ago
Reply to  Jerry Carroll

That’s a mad premise, America became a major power only after the first world war
Sure it was rich,very rich,before then but a world power? an empire before then ?
That’s a crazy Idea.

Susan Grabston
Susan Grabston
1 month ago
Reply to  Mark M Breza

Well republics don’t age well, so you are probably correct. The current form of government is dead – my focus is on what comes next.

Jerry Carroll
Jerry Carroll
1 month ago
Reply to  Mangle Tangle

I recommend people take a closer look at the attack on Pearl Harbor, the subject of no fewer than nine Congressional investigation over many years. At the end the disgraced Navy and Army commanders got their names cleared. They had been the fall guys for the White House which knew the Imperial Japanese Fleet was on the way but kept it from them. FDR had said the US needed to get into the war before the British were beaten and Pearl Harbor was “the bloody nose” it would take. The two indispensible carriers put to sea before the attack, leaving the row of obsolete battleships to take the blow. Hidden conspiracies are the reason history has to be revised from time to time.

Duane M
Duane M
1 month ago
Reply to  Jerry Carroll

The attack on Pearl Harbor was also a natural and predictable result of the USA putting the squeeze on Japan through economic sanctions.

From “How U.S. Economic Warfare Provoked Japan’s Attack on Pearl Harbor” :
In 1939 the United States terminated the 1911 commercial treaty with Japan. “On July 2, 1940, Roosevelt signed the Export Control Act, authorizing the President to license or prohibit the export of essential defense materials.” Under this authority, “[o]n July 31, exports of aviation motor fuels and lubricants and No. 1 heavy melting iron and steel scrap were restricted.” Next, in a move aimed at Japan, Roosevelt slapped an embargo, effective October 16, “on all exports of scrap iron and steel to destinations other than Britain and the nations of the Western Hemisphere.” Finally, on July 26, 1941, Roosevelt “froze Japanese assets in the United States, thus bringing commercial relations between the nations to an effective end. One week later Roosevelt embargoed the export of such grades of oil as still were in commercial flow to Japan.”[2] The British and the Dutch followed suit, embargoing exports to Japan from their colonies in southeast Asia.
source: https://www.independent.org/news/article.asp?id=1930 (How U.S. Economic Warfare Provoked Japan’s Attack on Pearl Harbor, by Robert Higgs).
[2] Quotations are from George Morgenstern, “The Actual Road to Pearl Harbor,” in Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace, pp. 322–23, 327–28.

0 0
0 0
1 month ago
Reply to  Mangle Tangle

“Those who win despite the deep state (arguably Eisenhower) figure it out fast.”
VERY arguably Eisenhower. Steven Ambrose’s bio of Ike reveals a man who was buddy-buddy with both Dulles brothers and who was a big booster of the CIA early on (and its forerunner, the OSS).  

Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
1 month ago
Reply to  Daniel P

The guy with zero institutional power is not the threat to democracy. All of the institutions – the media, the bureaucracy, big tech, academia, the arts, high finance etc. – all share radical, progressive ideology that threaten the freedom of us all.

AJ Mac
AJ Mac
1 month ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

He is the de facto head of the Republican Party, for all its troubles a major institutional power.

Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
1 month ago
Reply to  AJ Mac

Cmon AJ. All the institutions are dominated by the left. You know this.

AJ Mac
AJ Mac
1 month ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

Wildly off the mark. Unless you pretend to include the military, FBI, CIA*, police, financial mega interests, churches, corporations, and Supreme Court in your Frankenstein’s monstrosity of the mind.
*Bear in mind that if, for example, a slight majority of CIA personnel oppose Trump (and with plenty of cause) that does not mean most of them are of the Left.

Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
1 month ago
Reply to  AJ Mac

Are there some institutions that are conservative and support Trump
and the GOP? Of course there are, but they have a minuscule fraction of power that is wielded by other institutions.

Religious groups seem to support Trump. I would say most low ranking soldiers are conservative. The military leadership despises Trump, in particular, because he possibly maybe threatens the military industrial complex. I think it’s fair to say the police are more conservative. I’ve never seen any reporting on the political leaning of the FBI and CIA so I have no idea.

Corporations no longer lean right. The Dems have have support from almost all the big players and get the bulk of billion dollar donors. This is well known.

The important institutions, the ones that shape policy and ideas are almost all to the left. The regime media, education, academia, big tech, high finance, the arts, the bureaucracy – we know these are 80% left.

To say the right has any meaningful institutional power is gobsmacking.

AJ Mac
AJ Mac
1 month ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

You keep blurring the line between anti-Trump and of-the-Left with every third step. Trump ain’t conservative! He’s a trashy silver-spoon rogue who used to be a dirtbag Democrat and is now a dirtbag Republican.
What is both gobsmacking (good adjective by the way) and myopic is the notion that Right-identified forces–whether genuinely conservative, populist, or f a s c i s t–control or influence nothing in the world as you observe it.

Damon Hager
Damon Hager
1 month ago
Reply to  Daniel P

More in sorrow than in anger, as a Briton who sincerely wishes your country well, I agree with you.

Mark M Breza
Mark M Breza
1 month ago
Reply to  Daniel P

He knew the art of the Deal
Not when to Fold them !o!

Stephanie Surface
Stephanie Surface
1 month ago
Reply to  Daniel P

Thanks for this interesting link…

Richard Simpson
Richard Simpson
1 month ago
Reply to  Daniel P

Maguire is another Silicon Valley character out of Alex Garland’s cinema. J. Chait is spot on, and this is the kind of GOP spawn that derives from Mr.Lind’s literate victimhood for the King! https://x.com/jonathanchait/status/1796513380460806602

Jerry Carroll
Jerry Carroll
1 month ago

Chait is a journalist cog of the deep state.

Ellen Evans
Ellen Evans
1 month ago

Mr. Herd member, why do you even come to this website?

0 0
0 0
1 month ago
Reply to  Daniel P

That judge, by the way, was hand-picked by the Powers That Be, not from a lottery (which is the way it’s supposed to be done.). To your larger point– that America is under the thumb of a “corrupt and morally bankrupt oligarchy”– the question becomes how we got to this point. I don’t have an answer to that question, though I do believe that the genesis may go back to America’s entry into The Great War. Whatever the case may be, it is becoming increasingly clear to me that as a country we are so riddled with what may be likened to a spreading cancer to the point where one has to wonder if this thing of ours…even works anymore.

Colorado UnHerd
Colorado UnHerd
1 month ago
Reply to  Daniel P

“….either you have to support Trump or you have to concede that the oligarchy, the “elite”, have won.”
One word: Kennedy.

Ex Nihilo
Ex Nihilo
1 month ago
Reply to  Daniel P

I agree with all you say. Your military service and the tradition of your family is a tremendous honor. Yes, we Americans are now citizens of a banana republic and, as such, will join the ranks of the many South, Central, and North American countries that swing regularly back and forth between authoritarian far left and far right “governments” none of which ever displace the massive endemic corruption and crime. Some of the European commenters display gleeful schadenfreude over our demise, ignoring that Europe too is hurtling toward its own unique abyss, eventually destined to become an outpost of “the Caliphate”, as evidenced in particular by the recent lawfare waged by the I.C.C. and in general by the demographic tsunami that will inevitably deliver control of most of its institutions to Islamists.

William Simonds
William Simonds
1 month ago

Well, it looks like I’ll be voting for a convicted felon. That is the bottom line, after all. And it is likely that this element of “lawfare” has not only galvanized and hardened me and his base, but may have turned Trump into a martyr and attracted some on the fence (Libertarians, I’m talking to you here) who might not have voted for him otherwise but now see the clear and present danger of elitism. To be sure, Trump is no saint. You sow the wind, you reap the whirlwind. My feeling is that while this is definitely partisan and undeniably political, it is in fact legal. He has brought this on himself by playing fast and loose in his business dealings. So a lot of this type of opinion piece is just plain bellyaching. Can we not please admit he’s guilty but that the punishment doesn’t fit the crime, let him appeal, and just vote for him in November if we think he’s the better choice?

Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
1 month ago

I think this is fair assessment of Trump. He’s a narcissistic scumbag IMO and I have no doubt he’s shady and has broken the law many, many times. This case, however, is a sham and is a political perversion of justice.

AJ Mac
AJ Mac
1 month ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

I agree with you on that, Jim.

AJ Mac
AJ Mac
1 month ago

To your concluding sentence: exactly. At least admit to yourself who you’re voting for. The charges were in a quite literal sense trumped up–but they were not false. No one else would have faced the same scrutiny and vindictive prosecution.
But unless he rants and raves at Judge Merchan or his family without any restraint–which is entirely possible–he will not serve a day in jail. Nor will he for the (way oversized) 80-something million-dollar civil finding of sexual assault on E. Jean Carroll. Nor for his fake ass-university, phony charitable foundation, or anything else.
If you must and are an eligible citizen yourself, you’ll still get to vote for him: an angry, petty, self-absorbed dictator fanboy and wannabe, but a free man.

Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
1 month ago
Reply to  AJ Mac

The thing is Biden and the Dems are much more awful in a more important way. Open borders, net zero, CRT/DEI, forever wars, etc. are a much bigger threat to the U.S. and its allies. Sucks that Trump is the only realistic option.

Carlos Danger
Carlos Danger
1 month ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

I think you underrate Donald Trump. It’s true that his tweets are often silly and mean. But that’s just an act. He has a wicked sense of humor, with timing like a stand-up comic. It’s no wonder his television show was a hit.

He’s said to be warm and engaging in person. He’s generous too. His ghostwriter, who is now a critic, marveled at what a generous contract Donald Trump gave him. All his wives and children are fans.

Some people, in fact many people, don’t like his shtick. They prefer someone more presidential in their president. I can understand that feeling.

But as a a president, I think Donald Trump was masterful. He is a master of the art of the deal. I’ve worked on billions of dollars of deals in my career, and he’s one of the best I have seen.

Look at what he tried to do with Russia. In 2018 he reinvigorated NATO, warned Germany of their foolishness in putting their neck in Russia’s noose, met with Vladimir Putin in Helsinki, and tried to get Russia back in the G8. He could sense the problems coming.

North Korea was another example. Donald Trump made a masterful play at Kim Jong Un. He couldn’t close the deal, but even the best dealmakers don’t always win.

We’ve never had a president like Donald Trump before, and likely won’t again. For all his faults, and he has strong weaknesses, I hope he gets four more years. The nation needs him.

Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
1 month ago
Reply to  Carlos Danger

Being presidential is important. When Trump warned Germany in 2018 that it was addicted to Russian gas, they scoffed at him. They didn’t take him seriously.

I’m not saying Trump was a bad president. He did lots of great things. So did many presidents, like Clinton and Reagan. They did it while being presidential.

In some ways, Trump’s successes are magnified by the shear incompetence of Biden. I honestly can’t think of one accomplishment from Biden. This makes Trump’s record look better.

AJ Mac
AJ Mac
1 month ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

lowest unemployment rate in 50 years / important early 2021 vaccination effort that was well coordinated (given State Rights) / withdrew from Afghan forever war, however ugly the exit / took correct side in Ukraine-Russia War / isn’t Trump
[they wouldn’t let me do a bullet point or numbered list so why give the option(s)?]

AJ Mac
AJ Mac
1 month ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

How is every war that begins anywhere in the world, for any reason, the fault of the sitting U.S. President?
It was Obama and Biden who actually got us out of the George Bush Forever Wars, in Iraq and Afghanistan respectively. And most of the outspoken commenters on this platform support the scorched earth approach in Gaza. Biden doesn’t (though the blank check should be withheld). How about Trump?
I agree with you on some of the other stuff but it sucks that you and many others conclude that Trump is a less dangerous, more world-stabilizing option than Old Joe.
Given your overall clear-eyed view of the man, that is very disappointing.

Studio Largo
Studio Largo
1 month ago

Guilty of what, paying off a one night stans? FFS, the vacuous, hypocritical miralizing.

Gerry Quinn
Gerry Quinn
1 month ago

Indeed. This will give some a reason to vote against Trump, but others a reason to vote for him. Which will win out, who can say?

McLovin
McLovin
1 month ago

Before anyone downvotes I am far from a woke liberal. But Trump is a crook pure and simple – and a liar and a cheat – he even cheats at golf.
Right wing Americans should try and find someone else that represents them.

Alex Lekas
Alex Lekas
1 month ago
Reply to  McLovin

He’s such a crook that no court ever bothered with him until he ran for president, every politician that now claims to hate him eagerly sought out his campaign donations, and one of the major television networks paid him to run a reality show for 10+ years.

McLovin
McLovin
1 month ago
Reply to  Alex Lekas

Not a liar or cheat either then I guess? My mistake. I can see now why this guy with orange skin, orange hair, a serial adulterer, with a limited grasp of the English language, and even more limited grasp of logic or common sense (does anyone remember his idea of injecting people with disinfectant to counter covid?), is so admired – by some. As I said my mistake.

Alex Lekas
Alex Lekas
1 month ago
Reply to  McLovin

He did not suggest injecting anyone with anything. Even the fact-checkers who are prone to oppose anything he says didn’t buy that claim: https://www.statesman.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/07/13/fact-check-did-trump-tell-people-to-drink-bleach-to-kill-coronavirus/113754708/
We have a sitting president whose personal wealth stems solely from using his son as a bagman in selling influence and a former president whose personal habits required a unit to police what his wife called ‘bimbo eruptions.’ But somehow, a misdemeanor offense that the feds passed on is an issue. When the man is re-elected, just remember that you asked for what follows.

McLovin
McLovin
1 month ago
Reply to  Alex Lekas

Really, so I must have misheard what he said in that news conference then (even though I heard it more than once). OK, time for a hearing check then.
I’m not asking for anything (I live in the UK so don’t get to vote in the US) – I’m just stating the obvious.

McLovin
McLovin
1 month ago
Reply to  Alex Lekas

FYI – direct quote from Youtube “I see that disinfectant that knocks it out in a minute – one minute – and is there a way we can do something like that by injection inside”.

Katja Sipple
Katja Sipple
1 month ago
Reply to  McLovin

I don’t care for the chap at all, but he did not suggest injecting people with disinfectant or bleach. Clumsily worded, yes, but blown out of proportion by media: https://www.wral.com/amp/21351899/

McLovin
McLovin
1 month ago
Reply to  Katja Sipple

What do you not understand about the sentence I’ve just quoted? “do something like that” clearly refers to disinfectant in the earlier part of the sentence. Go back to the original news conference on Youtube. I didn’t say bleach btw.

Gerry Quinn
Gerry Quinn
1 month ago
Reply to  McLovin

Trump is hardly a great scientific intelligence, but he was asking a reasonably sane question about whether certain things known to kill Covid viruses could be leveraged as a treatment. He told nobody to inject bleach.

Leslie Smith
Leslie Smith
1 month ago
Reply to  Katja Sipple

Just remember the US Media are about 99% the propaganda wing of the Dem Party. As they say, the difference between those who wrote for “Pravda” and those who write for the NY Times, Wash Post, et al., is Russians had a gun pointed at them, while the USA press gladly shills for their Dem Party masters.

Leonel SIlva Rocha
Leonel SIlva Rocha
1 month ago
Reply to  McLovin

The TDS is really strong in you. I would respectfully suggest you seek medical help…

Damon Hager
Damon Hager
1 month ago
Reply to  McLovin

Yes, orange hair. Good argument.

Charles Hedges
Charles Hedges
1 month ago
Reply to  McLovin

New York liked him before he entered politics as Republican. Why did the Clintons attend his wedding if he was so awful? The reality is that the Democrats have lost tough with the blue collar manual workers and Trump is a threat because he connects with them and increasingly African Americans and Hispanics. If he was not a threat he would be ignored. The number of state employees is increasing but does the USA get value for money? Trump is asking a basic question, does the USA get value for money from the state employees?

Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
1 month ago
Reply to  McLovin

Totally agree with the Trump assessment. It doesn’t make this persecution, err prosecution, any more palatable.

T Bone
T Bone
1 month ago
Reply to  McLovin

Yes because you wouldn’t just do the same thing to DeSantis or whoever else ran. This is what you guys do. We understand that. There’s no need to rationalize your perspective. You hate Trump because he ran as a Republican change agent. You want control over both parties…a party that rules and a party that provides minimal performative resistance to that rule.

Enjoy your woke tribunals. Good luck getting any defense from common people when the Leftist blockade comes for you.

Leslie Smith
Leslie Smith
1 month ago
Reply to  McLovin

Bill Clinton cheated at golf too, and he and Hillary stole from millions from their Clinton Global Initiative, including money donated to help Haitians following the earthquake and hurricane – so where’s your outrage at what the Clintons have done, and Biden and his lucrative business connections with Ukraine, Uzbekistan, China, et al.?

Christopher
Christopher
1 month ago
Reply to  McLovin

But who? An establishment RINO? It’s more than just the man but a movement rejecting the ever more dangerous woke, race hustling, media loving system. Once the “ gay marriage” question was answered by SCOTUS overnight what replaced these campaign contributors? The 24/7 trans movement. Create a victim and weaponize it. Believe men can give birth or else. Promote men destroying women’s sports, or else.

UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
1 month ago

Oh please. This is just a narrative opinion and not a representation of reality. The actual facts are far different. I usually like Lind’s work but this is knee-jerk garbage. There were specific laws broken by Trump. Cohen went to jail for the same things. A couple points:
1) Just because someone promises to prosecute Trump doesn’t mean it’s just partisan hack-work. If that person believes, based on evidence, he broke laws, it’s their job to prosecute and saying they’ll do that is saying ‘I’m going to do the job I was elected to do.’
2) Garland is, if anything, cautious to the point of favoring Trump. He took FOREVER to even put Jack Smith on the case that CLEARLY was a simple legal issue (the top secret documents). Trump’s case is TOTALLY DIFFERENT than Biden’s. The documents were far more sensitive and numerous, Trump lied, evaded, ignored requests, and attempted to keep the documents–and showed them to people, a clear breach of security. All of this is very simple to understand for anyone with common sense. LAWS WERE BROKEN BY TRUMP. It would be a travesty not to prosecute that. Biden’s case, nothing like that.
I love how Republicans (and btw, I’m not a Democrat, there’re things I loath about that party but right now the R’s live in crazy town) always scream persecution, but if someone is actually breaking (a lot) of laws it’s not persecution, it’s just people doing the f’ing jobs (even if they happen to be democrats).
***this comment doesn’t seem to be showing up. If UnHerd isn’t approving pretty mild comments like this you can cancel my subscription.

Alex Lekas
Alex Lekas
1 month ago
Reply to  UnHerd Reader

Trump’s case is TOTALLY DIFFERENT than Biden’s.
Indeed. As a former president, Trump is allowed some leeway regarding documents no matter their classification, along with the power to declassify them. It happens every time a president leaves office. As a Senator and then VP, Biden had neither rationale at his disposal. His possession of those docs alone is a crime. But not only did he have them, the papers were spread out haphazardly across an office at the University of Pennsylvania, his garage, and who knows where else.
Just because someone promises to prosecute Trump doesn’t mean it’s just partisan hack-work. 
When someone runs an election campaign on that premise, like Leticia James did, it’s pretty much partisan hack work. NY has no shortage of crime, but it’s prosecutors are more focused on petty issues while the locals are robbed, assaulted, and on occasion, killed. That’s okay. To people on the left, I remind them that they asked for whatever follows, including Trump’s re-election. At this point, the ‘stop Trump’ crowd has one move left.

Leonel SIlva Rocha
Leonel SIlva Rocha
1 month ago
Reply to  Alex Lekas

“Trump’s case is TOTALLY DIFFERENT than Biden’s.”

Lest we ignore the blatant faulty use of grammar… It’s”different From…”, not “than from”. Almost shocking to see this from a established Writer…

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 month ago
Reply to  Alex Lekas

Biden returned the documents, Trump didn’t.

Leonel SIlva Rocha
Leonel SIlva Rocha
1 month ago
Reply to  UnHerd Reader

“Trump’s case is TOTALLY DIFFERENT than Biden’s.”

It’s different From, not different Than. Are you an English native speaker? It wouldn’t seem so…

William Edward Henry Appleby
William Edward Henry Appleby
1 month ago

Different than is perfectly respectable American English. Perhaps the OP is American?

Gerry Quinn
Gerry Quinn
1 month ago

‘Than’ is strictly speaking ungrammatical, simply by logic. But it is not uncommon, and therefore it is English.
[I will admit to saying it occasionally, though I would always take care not to write it.]

T Bone
T Bone
1 month ago
Reply to  UnHerd Reader

I noticed you provided zero analysis of the individual case facts, which is typical of petty tyrants.

In criminal law, the analysis is based on the specifics of an individual case; not a conglomeration of unrelated things that “add up.”

This was a garbage case. Any basic analysis shows that. That you think this is how the legal system should operate shows you’re voting on team that fits your character.

Alex Lekas
Alex Lekas
1 month ago

Like the monster in old sci-fi films, Trump grows stronger with each attempt to stop him. His campaign website crashed briefly last night from the stampede of people pouring in to make donations. Two things are clear: 1) whatever follows, the left asked for it, to include Trump’s re-election. The author is not alone among people who don’t like Orange McBadman but recognize a problem when they see it.
2) Dems and the fellow establishment travelers on the right are down to their last option. It’s one few people want to talk about, but when your goal is to stop someone, the parameters of ‘stop’ widen after every failed attempt.

Ardath Blauvelt
Ardath Blauvelt
1 month ago

Well stated.

Judy Posner
Judy Posner
1 month ago

Who are you people? Of all the articles and comments I have read in UnHerd over the years, this is certainly the most AbSurd. As a Liberal Democrat who dislikes so called progressive cancel culture and is judiciously open to conservative voices, this piece makes me reconsider my open-mindedness. E gads!

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 month ago
Reply to  Judy Posner

Well said, Judy.

Rasmus Fogh
Rasmus Fogh
1 month ago

An interesting account (and fairly balanced) of how the trial went can be found here. Their version is that the proof of the accounting fraud being to further a second crime was on the thin side, and that was a necessary part of the accusation. However the Trump team did not concentrate on making this point. Instead they tried to prove that Stormzy, Cohen etc. were lying and that the hush money payments never happened. And here they very much had the evidence against them. Which left the jury having to choose between the prosecutor’s story, and a team Trump version that was simply not believable.

Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
1 month ago
Reply to  Rasmus Fogh

I’ve heard various accounts of the failings of the Trump legal team, but I don’t think they denied that hush payments were actually made to Stormy. He denied sleeping with her, which was a huge mistake, but I don’t think he denied the hush money.

AJ Mac
AJ Mac
1 month ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

Yes he did, through his lawyers*, acting according his own wishes. The defense approach was a self-defeating, scattershot denial, which some will still treat as the inscrutable brilliance of the Orange Oracle,
He certainly can still win, but this won’t help him among those not already devoted to him.
Quite a few tradesmen, farmers, and small business owners will donate more to his campaign slush fund though.
*And on his own behalf too:
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/stormy-daniels-face-tough-questions-trump-lawyers-trial-2024-05-09/

Wyatt W
Wyatt W
1 month ago

Imagine claiming Trump is the danger to democracy yet manufacturing a complete nonsense case to convict and likely jail a political opponent. This is something I’d expect to read Putin doing to a Navalny figure. 3rd world banana republic type stuff. I was reluctantly going to vote for Trump before, no reluctance now.

marianna chambless
marianna chambless
1 month ago

Interesting article. However, I found it a surprise that in his discussion of the misuse of the Espionage Act he failed to mention Julian Assange.

Jonathan Saxton
Jonathan Saxton
1 month ago

Trump has the “MO” of a traditional American mobster. Not of the killer but of the grift variety. Check the history of the prosecution and conviction of such people in the US and you will find that the vast majority of them have used the particularities of American criminal law to insulate themselves from direct involvement in heir crimes. The same is true of the wealthy who insulate themselves from the “rule of law” in all sorts of ways. The few that are prosecuted successfully are charged with things like tax evasion, or with various types of attempts to cover-up their misdeeds, including lying to federal agents. These aren’t necessarily the originally committed crimes, but the crimes of trying to conceal them.
Trump has traditionally been a master “mobster” in this mold. His life and livelihood have been thoroughly characterized by all sorts of lying and cheating. He has said many times that people who don’t figure out how to do this are “losers.” He has proudly broken laws and cheated people all of his life without any real consequences.
But then he became president and brought his grifts to the White House where the whole world can see you. The fact is that Trump has been extremely stupid. He failed to adapt his grifts sufficiently to the office. He wasn’t prepared for the bright lights that illuminate someone in public office.
And so he just carried-on with his lying and grifting as usual and now he’s getting nailed for these things. He has been stupid. And he has been poorly served by a succession of people he hired to continue to insulate him from accountability.
This is nothing like a political persecution. It’s all about snaring a life-long grifter who finally got in over his head such that the law could catch-up with him. End of story.

AJ Mac
AJ Mac
1 month ago

“This is nothing like a political persecution. It’s all about snaring a life-long grifter who finally got in over his head such that the law could catch-up with him”.
Why can’t it be both?
I think it’s a targeted, politically-motivated, well-deserved comeuppance. Probably the first of many.
The nature and timing of all this could hasten our national march toward another civil war though.

Gerry Quinn
Gerry Quinn
1 month ago

It is a story that seems to belong more in Ancient Rome than in what we think of as the modern era, to be sure. Trump is not a sophisticated modern politician. But the world has changed, and it may be that the time of the sophisticates is over for now.

Bret Larson
Bret Larson
1 month ago

Its all part of Trumps ingenious plan to get elected.
The funny part is that Democrats’ are willing to play their role.

Andrew Boughton
Andrew Boughton
1 month ago

This article is far too dismissive of the charges, and belittles the attempted coup when Trump’s reality tv cast attacked the Capitol.