Trump as martyr to lawfare at the hands of the Democrats
Clearly, the Democrats thought it would be well worth it to convict Trump in a nakedly political show trial. The lawyers among them – and there are many such – had to be aware of the abysmal weakness of the case. They also had to be aware that a guilty verdict ran the risk of turning Trump into a martyr, a transformation that Russiagate and two impeachments had already begun but that the trials would intensify greatly.
So why did they do it? I think there are a host of reasons, some emotional and some cerebral. The emotional motive is clear: they wanted to see him squirm and they wanted power over him. You can see their glee about that now. But the other calculations are probably as follows:
(1) Take up his time and money in fighting the charges, and make it hard for him to campaign.
(2) Frighten other Republicans who fear the same thing can happen to them.
(3) Don’t televise the trial and instead filter it for the public through the compliant and Trump-hating MSM.
(4) For the entire campaign, call Trump a convicted felon. It is hoped that this will turn off many Independents who might otherwise have voted for him, and even some Republicans.
(5) Allow Stormy Daniels free rein to talk about a purported sexual liaison with Trump, thus embarrassing him and humiliating him and hurting Melania into the bargain.
(6) Perhaps jail him; we’re still not sure how that will go.
But there was always one big danger, and it remains. The case was weak and strange, transparently a show trial in a Democratic venue run by Democrats and peopled by Democrats on the jury. This took away from its validity and authenticity. The more people who perceived this, the more people who might consider Trump a martyr and the Democrats tyrants, which might increase the vote total for Trump rather than reduce it.
Which brings us to point number 7 on the list: Democrats must have thought and must still think that they will be able to overcome any voting deficit through cheating and/or rigging. Perhaps they are right – but then again, perhaps they are wrong. I’ve read various polls on the election today that say the conviction might actually help Trump slightly with voters, but I’m not even going to discuss them in depth here because I think it’s way too early to tell. One thing we do know is that donations to Trump increased greatly, post-verdict.
Another thing that’s obvious is that the Democrats are not afraid of Republican retaliation in kind. At the moment, because he is the president, Joe Biden is immune from criminal prosecution. They are banking on his remaining president for four more years, and after that will he even be around? If he is, he will be even more decrepit and supposedly either too sympathetic for that reason or actually too incompetent to stand trial.
But there are lesser Democrats who might be vulnerable. The Democrats are probably relying on several things to protect them: their capture of the FBI and DOJ, the fact that Republicans could not get a conviction in DC no matter what the offense of the accused Democrat, and the idea that Republicans are not cutthroat enough to go through with what the Democrats are willing to do in the name of a ruthless drive to power.
It remains to be seen whether the Democrats are correct about all of that. But even such a formerly mild and non-Trump-loving lawyer-pundit as John Hinderaker is proposing what I guess would be called civil disobedience by Republicans against Democrats:
If Joe Biden is re-elected following this outrage, he will be an illegitimate president. What does that mean? It means, I think, that no one should be obliged to follow his executive orders. All such orders will be illegitimate and should be disregarded, as appropriate. Likewise, residents of the sane states, and their public officials, should be free to disregard rules and orders that come out of the Biden administration’s agencies–the Biden EPA, and so on. And rulings of Biden-appointed judges, or of panels on which one or more Biden judges were part of the majority, should not be given any precedential effect.
More fundamentally, the Democratic Party is now illegitimate. We should stop treating it as a normal political organization. We conservatives have played by the rules, trying to hold our country together in the face of increasingly radical and irrational conduct from our political foes. Those days should be gone. The Democratic Party is now exposed as the enemy of freedom, democracy and the rule of law, and should be treated accordingly.
And yesterday Hinderaker advocated ruthless lawfare on the part of Republicans:
… [T]he Democrats understand nothing except the raw exercise of power. Therefore, Republican attorneys general and district attorneys should bring criminal charges against Democratic officeholders wherever possible. No Democratic officeholder should be allowed to retire, in any jurisdiction with Republican law enforcement, without facing criminal charges. …
Third, the criminal prosecutions should begin with Joe Biden. Unlike Trump, Biden is actually a criminal. He is already known to be guilty under the federal bribery statute, to the tune of at least $20 million. If Trump wins in November, his Department of Justice should immediately indict Biden, and Biden should be hounded until the day he dies or goes to prison, whichever happens first.
Of course, Republicans face a disadvantage that Democrats don’t. Some cases, including, I assume, a federal criminal prosecution of Biden, would have to be brought on the Democrats’ home turf, Washington, D.C. If that is the case, so be it: as Mark Steyn says, the process is the punishment. Biden likely would not live long enough to face a jury in any case.
And attorneys general in states like Texas, Florida, South Dakota, etc., should look into whether Biden’s taking of bribes or other actions could qualify as crimes under their states’ laws. After all, if Alvin Bragg can prosecute Donald Trump for federal campaign finance violations that he didn’t commit, another state official can likely find grounds to prosecute Biden for bribery, which he did commit.
It has been my impression that, until now, Hinderaker hasn’t been advocating any of this. And at least for quite some time he was not a Trump supporter. This event seems to have radicalized him – his J’Accuse…! and he is not alone. Anyone who cares about the rule of law faces the same decision about how best to fight this, because it cannot be countered by the usual means.
I plan to have more to say on that, too, in the future.
Neo: you are one of my (few) go-to sites. Your intelligence and sanity are a tonic on all subjects. Here, on the Trump prosecution, I hope you can maintain your trademark thoughtfulness and equilibrium –because I (and I think many others) all be needing it. It’s not enough to rant and rave.
I think you’re pretty accurate on Hinderaker’s “J’accuse” moment. I found it to be something of a “red line” moment, where he has simply had enough and moved from beard-pulling to something more like action. Let me guess: a lot of other people are at, or near, that point.
I pray for the country.
I understand donations to the Trump campaign and to the RNC are way up today. My bucks are among them.
It is clear that elements of the Democratic Party are constitution-hating Leftists.
The nation and its constitutional foundations are under major attack. The Bragg, Judge Merchan, NY AG and Fani Willis Democrats are totally corrupt, morally and/or financially.
It is up to us to fight back. This sham, show trial was the first step in Democratic degradation of the American Republic and its Constitution.
I wouldn’t waste your money on donations, when there’s a good chance that the squishy Republicans won’t nominate him as their candidate after his (maximum) prison sentencing occurs right before the convention.
When Biden stomps Haley without the aid of fraud and people start moaning that Trump was ahead in the polls and could’ve won, the Democrats can smugly respond, “Well, who’s fault is it that he wasn’t on the ballot? Certainly not ours.”
dickson:
Concern troll?
You’re not the only one who noted Hinderaker’s comments, and realized what they might mean. Sarah Hoyt drew attention to it in the comments on her blog, as well.
As for me, since I’m not currently in a position to engage in lawfare, I would encourage people to mock the charges. They really are stupid charges. His books say “Legal Expenses” instead of “NDA payment to get a slut to shut up”. That is literally the entirety of the charge.
How many people can keep a straight face when discussing a charge like that?
More likely that the trash left will try to dox the donors and get them fired from their jobs. That’s how those @#$&** roll.
Hinderaker’s intent was pretty clear to me. I think BLM, Antifa, and the Hamas supporter’s have drawn a road map.
But, I was fantsizing about how a shut down of NYC might look Suppose Rolling Thunder made a prolonged visit; or independent truckers rolled in enmasse as in Canada–or decided not Io make deliveries at all?
Hey FBI, I am not advocating. Just speculating.
THE WRATH OF THE AWAKENED SAXON
by Rudyard Kipling
It was not part of their blood,
It came to them very late,
With long arrears to make good,
When the Saxon began to hate.
They were not easily moved,
They were icy — willing to wait
Till every count should be proved,
Ere the Saxon began to hate.
Their voices were even and low.
Their eyes were level and straight.
There was neither sign nor show
When the Saxon began to hate.
It was not preached to the crowd.
It was not taught by the state.
No man spoke it aloud
When the Saxon began to hate.
It was not suddently bred.
It will not swiftly abate.
Through the chilled years ahead,
When Time shall count from the date
That the Saxon began to hate.
Like others here, I made my first donation ever to a presidential candidate last night. One and done. A protest, and an act of solidarity, less with Trump than with my fellow citizens who see this totalitarian spectacle for what it is.
“Junior” at 2:49: “… His books say ‘Legal Expenses’ instead of ‘NDA payment to get a slut to shut up’. That is literally the entirety of the charge.”
Excellent distillation of the case.
Remember with all the talk of radicalism. There must be blood. There must be blood.
I, too, was surprised by John Hinderaker’s posts given his disapproval of Trump’s character. But John tried over 100 jury trials and that case was a complete abortion and affront to every honest lawyer.
I’ve said it many times: If we lose the Rule of Law in this country, we are finished.
The Left doesn’t care about the Rule of Law. If Trump is able to overcome the cheating, there has to be consequences and punishment of these Dems.
I think Hinderaker’s first recommendation, conservative lawfare, is good and I hope red states look at it. No more Mr. Nice Guy. Actual crimes, not invented ones, shouldn’t be too hard to find with this Democrat crowd. His second recommendation, ignore the central government, is more iffy, and care will have to be taken. That’s the “j’accuse” cry.
Part of me is like Michael Corleone where he settled all family business, Mo Green, Barzini, Sollozzo.
Look at the evidence to convict Trump. “We’ve got plenty of hearsay and conjecture, those are kinds of evidence.” – Lionel Hutz arguing in front of a judge (“often as a lawyer!”).
When the judge doesn’t allow the testimony of an FEC official to say that it wasn’t a crime, more people who paid attention knew it would never be a fair, impartial trial. The verdict added more.
The issue where it would come to a head is if the federal government would try to activate a state national guard to enforce what the state deemed to quell a protest against them. What would they do?
I agree with Hinderaker’s point of view and came to it several years ago. Biden is indeed illegitimate and should be treated as such. But what this means is that the principles on which this country was founded — principles which I’ve long admired and made this country special — have proven to be merely words on paper, unable to withstand the will to power of corrupt men. The checks and balances which were designed to protect us from the fiasco which we are currently living through have proven to be inadequate.
The remedies which Hinderaker suggests, although not unreasonable, are nevertheless an acknowledgement that our system is corrupt probably beyond repair. Even assuming that the Republicans are capable of successfully engaging in the type of lawfare that Democrats now routinely practice, that won’t stop Democrats from taking things to the next level. Things will get much worse before they have a chance of getting better
I was expecting this verdict, but it nevertheless made me incredibly sad for our country. Most of us are still lucky enough not to have faced direct consequences of our awful corrupt “justice” system. Mark Steyn is not so lucky and his comment on the verdict is one of the saddest things I’ve ever read.
“I will add one final thought born of my own experience. I am about to begin my thirteenth year in the foetid septic tank of the District of Columbia courts. My finances are ruined, and so is my constitution. By the latter, I mean my health, not the United States Constitution, which is already dead. By contrast, I’m just about hanging on, although I very much doubt I will live long enough to be vindicated at the Supreme Court. Which is bad news for my heirs and relicts. As one of the lawyers taunted me last year, “This doesn’t end with your death.”
I’m sad about that, and would much prefer to devote the time that remains to playing music and enjoying the sunsets. I am worn out, and bitter about the books I’ll never get to write because of the way American litigation has consumed what should have been my most productive years. I have a theological objection to suicide, but would not be averse to dying in my sleep.”
@Gregory Harper:Mark Steyn is not so lucky and his comment on the verdict…
Like Gridley from Bleak House. He didn’t know what he was getting into; he thought the courts do something different from what they actually do, he kept representing himself, and he seemed to think he’d win if he could prove Mann was wrong about the climate (which the court just doesn’t care about). Steyn, I’m afraid, created some of his own “bad luck”; the other litigants didn’t come off nearly as badly.
Lawfare against actual criminals is missing the point. These people need to be arrested at 0 dark 30 by trigger happy swat teams for the crime of being a donkey. Red states need to declare the donkey party a criminal organization and start to round up every dem mayor, lawyer, city council creep, etc. etc.
Re: Mark Steyn
It’s always worth reading Steyn. Here’s the link being referenced. It is nuanced though with bitterness for which I have no blame:
_______________________________________
I very much doubt I will live long enough to be vindicated at the Supreme Court. Which is bad news for my heirs and relicts. As one of the lawyers taunted me last year, “This doesn’t end with your death.”
I’m sad about that, and would much prefer to devote the time that remains to playing music and enjoying the sunsets. I am worn out, and bitter about the books I’ll never get to write because of the way American litigation has consumed what should have been my most productive years. I have a theological objection to suicide, but would not be averse to dying in my sleep.
–Mark Steyn, “A Republic? You Can Keep It.”
https://www.steynonline.com/14343/a-republic-you-can-keep-it
_______________________________________
I’m aware Steyn is having health problems, along with the legal. He is fighting the Good Fight.
Prayers.
huxley:
I believe he had several heart attacks and is much diminished in strength.
Thank you Huxley for the heads-up with regard to Steyn and the good directive to pray for him. I’ve long felt I could never endure what so many have at the hands of our political adversaries. The theft of time, emotion and money is huge. I cannot imagine enduring the strife if the men in my life were savaged like President Trump.
Wasting Trump’s time and money is, as you note Number One, as they know they are going to lose, and are getting desperate.
The Democrats have been a criminal organization since day one, unfortunately. Look at all the machines, all Democrats, and all evil.
I went on the Mark Steyn cruise last summer. He had already had two heart attacks and was visibly weakened but he still hosted the cruise and did several shows. On the last day of the cruise, his health took another turn for the worst and he was unable to host the final show. He suffered another heart attack after the cruise and spent the next couple months in a hospital in Italy and more time in France recuperating. This was all before his trial vs. Michael Mann in January which he lost and was ordered to pay Mann $1 million in punitive damages. He is appealing that verdict.
I’m not sure it’s “great minds” or anything like that. But I wondered about a congressman asking the ATF director if he and his agency were trying to convince law-abiding Americans to mount a Claymore mine on the front porch.
And…somebody put a picture of one up on my FB.
So I guess some besides Hinderaker are wondering if using the usual tools at the disposal of civilized people is going to work. And it wasn’t our idea.
I guess the foregoing is a metaphor.
Cap’n Rusty…that Kipling poem is floating around in an altered version. As written by Kipling, the line is “When the ENGLISH began to hate”
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/13085/13085-h/13085-h.htm#page443
It was written during the First World War. Saxony is a region in Germany….doubt that Kipling would have been praising the attributes of the Saxons.
@David Foster:doubt that Kipling would have been praising the attributes of the Saxons.
Don’t doubt it originally said “English”, but that was an “always at war with Eastasia” move, because he’d certainly praised the Saxons and identified them with the English as recently as 1911, back when the movement to identify the English with “the Teutonic race” was still in full swing (and criticized by Chesterton).
Re-Post: “Get Trump” is backfiring BIG TIME against the Dems! UPDATED!!
https://commoncts.blogspot.com/2024/05/re-post-get-trump-is-backfiring-big.html
@ sd > good catch; for those interested here is the source of the commoncts re-post.
https://spectator.org/get-trump-is-backfiring-already/
Filling out a Tweet cited therein, by Scott Adams:
As most of us, and the pundits we generally read, have noted: “Never has a verdict been more political and more unjust.”
Well, “never” may be too broad, but it’s certainly putting the icing on the politicized-unjust-lawfare cake. (Yes, I mean THAT cake shop.)
https://spectator.org/twelve-corrupt-jurors/
Bawer describes how the plot of “12 Angry Men” was a tribute to the American justice system: although probably overly optimistic even then, its substance was more aspirational than descriptive, and a hallmark of the liberal ideology of the times.
However, there was no twelfth juror in the Trump case, and the plot seems taken from a different literary icon.
But someone needs to start it. Find a Conservative DOJ and a target, it isn’t hard to find one. But it has to start with one
Welcome to Consequences, Texas – this might work ;-P