"In the criminal justice system..."
Check out Civil Discourse with Joyce Vance to answer your legal questions
I have said that Donald Trump’s fiercest critics must be the strongest defenders of his criminal rights and the American system and way of life that he is trying to burn to the ground. Among the most fundamental concepts that underpin the American way of life are these:
Elections decide the outcome of the choice about whom it is that is vested with limited temporary constitutional power.
Every person charged with a crime is presumed innocent until proven guilty.
This second point applies to the very worst people in our society, including Donald Trump, who may be the worst. He is a disgrace without comparison. He annihilated his presidential oath of office with 30,000 documented lies and countless misdeeds and acts of corruption that resulted in two impeachments and a murderous insurrection. His conduct isn’t just reprehensible, it is crazed. He has exposed an insidious rot within American politics, media and business that is a threat to the future of democracy, both here and abroad. The simple fact that so many continue to follow Donald Trump as he continues to vandalize American culture isn’t just a desecration against every ideal and idea of the country, it’s an ongoing act of cowardice that may be the only thing that equals the despicableness of Trump’s conduct.
His remarks from Mar-a-Lago last night were further evidence of his derangement and his shrinking stature. He spoke to a half-filled ballroom of Trump Davidians in Palm Beach, while America’s cities were uniformly disinterested. America’s media can’t look away, while the American people continue to be held hostage by a brokenness in our politics that only seems irredeemable.
Despite all of the true underlying facts of Trump’s atrocious conduct, the question around the criminal charges being deeply flawed does not seem to be an unfair one. The most resonant among them seems to me to be this: would any person not named Donald Trump be charged with this?
Watching the multitudes of legal analysts opine around Donald Trump and what is happening is often painful. I trust Joyce Vance to figure out, and to clearly explain, what is happening. If you aren’t currently a subscriber to “Civil Discourse,” I would strongly encourage you to do so to seek legal clarity on all that is happening in American politics.
I have some questions about DA Alvin Bragg’s prosecution:
According to Vance, what Bragg is arguing is that “it’s about an effort to interfere with an election — and the details about the other crimes the DA believes he can prove Trump committed or concealed (or wanted to commit or conceal) in order to morph the basic misdemeanor false records charges into felonies. Trump was directing a scheme to interfere with the election, and he violated New York law in the process.” What jurisdiction does the Manhattan DA have regarding federal election law? To me, this is the same argument around the fact that Jim Jordan has no jurisdiction whatsoever to subpoena and interfere in a state prosecutorial matter. What am I missing here?
Is this a novel prosecution? Has there ever been similar charges made against any other American citizen ever?
What are your questions about this case?
Who do you trust to provide insights on all of these complicated legal matters?
I listened all day yesterday to most of the commentary about the indictment. What stood out to me was that Bragg presented an indictment on charges he felt he could win. He talked about NYS election law. We do have it LOL (not that it’s rigorously enforced). Nobody can predict how a jury will react in this case. And any trial is very far off. Meanwhile, we have the possibility of a cascading string of even more serious indictments that may be rolling out (please God!). Sleazy-X as I call him now (can’t stand to say the name) is one of the worst actors in American political history. His legacy will be the sewer he lived in his whole life. But let’s face it -- our country is seriously broken. As Steve points out so accurately, the press is seriously broken. Seriously. Our education level has fallen. And insurrectionists and white supremacists are essentially running the House. This is such a low point. But historians will point to others like 1876. Perhaps reading American history can be a comfort? I don’t know. Speculation right now does not help us. The only thing that helps is, like, what happened with the Wisconsin court results yesterday.
Steve, if it feels wrong, it’s probably quite wrong. Mens rea is the legal Latin term we use to describe criminal intent. Q: did Donald J. Trump have criminal intent? YES, he did. Does the DA have proof? Yes. He does. Case closed.