As Donald Trump’s sentencing lurches ever closer, his conviction is no less absurd. Democrats may celebrate, but this represents one of the darkest moments in U.S. electoral history.
For a former president and current presidential candidate to be convicted as a felon, any reasonable person would expect — demand, in fact — the evidence be undeniably strong and the law crystal clear. Neither is true in this case, and those who support Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s lawfare should be ashamed. Bragg has disgraced himself.
Even the media are questioning the conviction, with CNN legal analyst Elie Honig calling the Trump trial an “unjustified mess” and claiming it “blew his mind.” In his words: “No state prosecutor … has ever charged federal election laws as a direct or predicate state crime, against anyone, for anything.” Honig, a former assistant U.S. attorney, has also blasted prosecutors for “pushing the boundaries of due process.”
The lawfare is so dubious that even CNN is now crying foul and defending Trump. That’s a low point.
First and foremost, the Trump conviction is a blatant double standard. In 2016, Hillary Clinton’s campaign was fined $8,000 for violating federal campaign finance laws. Why? The Clinton machine falsely reported the funding of the infamous Steele dossier as “legal services” and “legal and compliance consulting,” although it was an attempt to smear Trump with salacious allegations that were untrue. Through the Steele dossier, Clinton’s team did indeed seek to influence the 2016 election to her benefit. (Shocker: It still failed to make her popular.)
And where was the Clinton campaign headquartered? In Brooklyn, New York, which would make the Steele dossier case fall under the jurisdiction of New York Penal Law §175.10. This is the state law that makes it a felony to falsify business records with the intent to conceal the commission of a crime.
That jurisdiction seems relevant, right? Wrong: Clinton was slapped on the wrist with a Federal Election Commission fine, whereas her former political opponent is now a felon.
There is no meaningful legal difference between the two cases except that Bragg was intent on weaponizing every possible legal statute — real or imagined — to destroy Trump. That’s not supposition — he openly campaigned on it. The only difference is the left’s obsession with its favorite non-legal theory: “Orange Man Bad.”
Partisanship is no justification to upend our legal system to “criminalize Trump,” and it’s just the left’s latest attempt to steal the 2024 election. Democrats aren’t shy about acknowledging it — they gloat openly about their success twisting the law to steal the 2020 election before the first ballots were counted and have been every bit as open about destroying everything America about America if it gets them their goal (power and control).
It is absurd to use an alleged federal law violation (which it is not, in this case) as the basis for a state law claim. Yes, it is illegal to pay off an adult film star from campaign funds. Still, Trump did not use campaign funds, and the state of New York ended up prosecuting him for not using campaign funds — based on a bizarre legal theory about “corrupting” the 2016 election.
You mean how the Bidens helped get rid of the New York Post story in 2020? That sort of corruption? The double standards never cease to amaze me.
Even if Trump were actually guilty, it would (at most) amount to a trivial FEC reporting fine like Clinton received, and that has nothing to do with state law.
There’s no other way to put it: The Trump conviction is a joke. What Democrats deserve now is for it to backfire at the polls. Fingers crossed.
