In a political circus, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg is prosecuting Donald Trump for his $130,000 payoff to porn star Stormy Daniels to prevent her from disclosing their affair. Not surprisingly, many Democrats are gleeful and practically wetting themselves with delight at seeing Trump doing the perp walk, even without handcuffs.
To the Democrats, this prosecution is like taking drugs. An exhilarating high, but likely to produce a painful hangover and long-lingering consequences. Bragg is an extreme progressive, elected by a notoriously liberal constituency, prosecuting a conservative former president for a dubious crime that other prosecutors declined. This might be the time for Democrats to step back and reconsider whether or not this prosecution is in their best interests. While it pleases the Trump-haters, they should consider how it appears to centrist voters, as well as the probable outcome and how it may impact them in the future.
The facts are pretty straightforward. Trump had a sexual affair with pom star Stormy Daniels, she threatened to go public and expose the affair and was paid $130,000 in hush money. During the 2016 election, she decided she could make even more money by selling her story and chose to renege on the deal. Represented by now-imprisoned shyster Daniel Avenatti, she unsuccessfully sued to be released from the nondisclosure agreement.
Trump’s problems arise from the payoff, which was paid by Trump attorney Michael Cohen from his personal funds. A payment was made by The Trump Organization to Cohen in apparent reimbursement and listed in corporate records as “legal expenses.” Bragg is prosecuting Trump for allegedly falsifying business records, a misdemeanor which he is trying to turn into a felony by claiming a conspiracy, fraud, or violation of election law.
While lots of fun for Democrats, the political optics of the prosecution are poor. This was a payoff to a blackmailer, and yet the blackmailer has never been prosecuted. The money paid came from Trump’s business. The charges are so weak that both the former Manhattan District Attorney, Democrat Cy Vance, and the U.S. Department of Justice declined to pursue charges. It is a minor crime with no victims, hardly the sort of thing that offends the public, and Bragg was declined far more serious crimes.
It is driven by political calculations and antipathy toward Trump.
Bragg’s extreme politics are likely to become the focus. Like the San Francisco District Attorney who was recently sacked by voters, Bragg also ran on a progressive platform of refusing to prosecute “low level crimes.” He made national headlines when he charged a 61-year-old grandfather bodega clerk with murder for the defensive stabbing of a much younger Black man who attacked him during a theft attempt, holding him on a $500,000 bond before public outrage forced him to drop the charges.
Here Bragg is playing to his political base, but the public is likely to see it as an attack by the Democratic Party generally, especially in view of the two unsuccessful impeachments and their usual hysterics over everything Trump.
This self-indulgent attack on political norms may be viscerally satisfying, but stunts for momentary advantage often backfire. Recall Harry Reid’s use of the “nuclear option” to drop the 60-vote requirement to beat a Senate filibuster so that he could force through some of President Obama’s judicial appointments over Republican opposition. As a result, Trump was later able to appoint three SCOTUS justices without any input from Democrats, turning the court conservative. Was it worth it?
The Republicans suffered historical losses in 1998 following their impeachment of Bill Clinton, despite unequivocal evidence of a felony.
Republican retribution is likely. For example, the Biden family’s dealings with Chinese and Ukrainian business interests could use some scrutiny. Biden also took classified documents home. Are you prepared to see Joe in handcuffs shuffling in and out of the courthouse in Cow Plop, Oklahoma, or some other red venue? Lots of prominent Democrats have lots of exposure on more serious crimes. Once you abandon political norms, everything is on the table. Payback can be a real bitch.
A former president is not above prosecution for breaking the law, and possibly Trump is guilty of some serious crimes. If there is clear proof that he participated in planning the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on Congress, he should be prosecuted. But the crime should be serious and the evidence clear and unequivocal. If we are to avoid becoming another banana republic using prison to sideline opposition leaders, we will have to limit ourselves to the most serious and provable crimes, or half of the country will see prosecutions as a naked power play to be avenged at the next opportunity.
I don’t like Trump and would otherwise be happy to see him sidelined. He is the one Republican who could lose to Biden in 2024. But this prosecution will take us to where we don’t want to go. Show a little self-control. Δ
John Donegan is a retired attorney in Pismo Beach, who feels like the guy who has to tell the frat party that the stripper didn’t show and the keg just ran dry. Send a reply for publication to letters@newtimesslo.com.
This article appears in Apr 13-23, 2023.
I agree, if the first indictments were about the Georgia election interference or the Jan. 6 insurrection, public interest in our justice system would be more serious. Perhaps Federalist Society participant Merrick Garland is to blame for the delay. The Stormy Daniels case is similar to the Monica Lewinsky affair: the lying and obstruction are the offenses, not the peccadillos that the press focuses on. What is different and concerning this time, though, are the attacks on the officers of the court and their families, the necessity of a gag order to prevent intimidation of jurors and witnesses. And with Jim Jordan using his committee to ‘investigate the investigators,’ GOP leaders calling for the elimination of the FBI, and even the Governor of Texas pardoning the convicted murderer of a peaceful BLM protester, we are seeing an all-out attack on the rule of law in this nation.
The only thing that will come of this prosecution is that it grants Trump a kind of “street cred'” with his stupid, barbarous cult devotees. The deplorables see the orange turd as a martyr, comparing his trials to the stations of the cross endured by Jesus Christ on the way to his crucifixion at the hands of the deep state. Trump’s psychopathic followers love how he flaunts authority & the rule of law, as he gives the middle finger to the “establishment.” For the redneck fools in the MAGA cult he’s their cool “bad boy figure,” a cool antihero owning the libs. With Trump, any publicity is good publicity, so he revels in this current circus that will undoubtedly drag on & on… We are witnessing the banality of evil & perhaps the evil of banality ,as this slimy piece of waste maintains his grip on the media and7 his fascist party.
Peaceful BLM protestor? Approaching the defendant with a loaded AK-47? And part of a mob surrounding the motorist and pounding on his car? Funny, but when Rittenhouse carried his assault rifle to a “demonstration”, we was accused of provoking the rioters into attacking him, yet this guy is just a blameless “peaceful protestor”.
John,
Your lengthy editorial has some good points and appears to contain several well-founded facts. But toward your closing, you appear to take a giant leap backwards with … “if we are to avoid becoming a banana republic using prison to sideline opposition leaders”. The U.S. is not and never will become a “banana republic” because unlike those 3rd world countries we have multiple levels of checks and balances to avoid criminal government actions or for that matter allowing our leaders to participate in criminal actions, which is exactly why Jack Smith is investigating Trump & why Bragg decided to indict Trump. Bragg has successfully prosecuted hundreds of defendants that have committed the exact same crimes (mail fraud, wire fraud, tax evasion); no difference with Trump. It’s the first in a long line of charges coming Trump’s way. You mentioned your dislike for Trump primarily because he’s the one person who could loose (again) to Biden. Doesn’t it get exhausting defending a crook / con-artist who has logged 3,500 lawsuits and has been accused of committing 60 criminal offenses? Republicans who dislike Democrats, social programs, the Government, taxes, progressive views, and science-driven facts love him because he represents them and their support is unwavering. Citing an insurrection on Jan. 6? No problem. Obstruction of justice, failing to report taxable income, witness tampering, theft of classified government records, solicitation to commit election fraud, bribery, influencing government officials to alter official records, making false statements, obstruction of an official proceeding, tax evasion and payment of individuals to alter the outcome of an election? No problem. And now looking back in time there’s a hush within the GOP and a sense it’s all gone terribly wrong, and wonderment as to how and why the GOP didn’t derail this orange train wreck years ago.
John Donegan is an intellectual coward.
On one hand, he goes out of his way to defend Donald Trump for an offense which is well documented. He feloniously engaged in a conspiracy to cover up affairs with both Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougall. One of those conspiracists, Michael Cohen, has already done time in federal prison and was disbarred for felony campaign finance violations and tax evasion, the same charges levied against Trump.
But, late in his commentary, Donegan admits he doesn’t like Trump and would like to see him sidelined. I wonder what happens when Trump is indicted for tampering with an election in Georgia, or for concealing highly classified documents, or for inciting an insurrection against the United States. Will Donegan still defend Trump?
My guess is yes. Donegan could care less about Trump’s crimes as long as the country isn’t led by any Democrat. Donegan’s columns are brutally clear about his allegiance to the right with all of its misogyny, racism, gay bashing and hatred for basic equity in this nation.
I await with anticipation Donegan’s next column when he defends ultra-right wing SC Justice Thomas who has accepted lavish vacations as well as monetary gifts from a Republican mega-donor without declaring these contributions.
As Michael Smith rightly points out, Michael Cohen was the first half of the coverup crime of the illegal payment/payoff to Stormy Daniels. Cohen eventually pled guilty to some 8 related charges, was convicted, and sentenced to three years in prison. He was also disbarred.
Now Donald Trump, the second component of this coverup crime, will be tried. If the first component of this (these) crime(s) was guilty, what is the likely legal outcome for the second component, Cohen’s partner in crime?
Let’s be clear. Trump is not and never has been Conservative. Conservatives were shocked at his level of support in 2016 and his ability to steam roller other Republican candidates. Some Conservatives voted for him as the lesser of 2 evils in 2016. Not all of us. During his 4 years in office he made some solid judicial appointments. Other than that, he governed as a Liberal. I don’t care what he said about building a wall, only a small portion was built and without proper border security those fleeing Mexico, South and Central America will find ways to enter illegally. Building a physical wall was never the answer. If we intend to stop the flow of illegal entrants, we need to quit issuing ID and providing benefits and have teeth in enforcement of laws forbidding their employment. He never did any of that.
The objective of all Trump’s alleged Stormy Daniels affair false documents is simply election cheating.
That the man who freely calls others cheats and fakes is indeed a cheater in in the 2016 US presidential election is outrageous.
I say Mr Bragg is trying to maintain American democracy. And with Trump’s teams of lawyers this is beyond formidable. Don’t forget Trump bragging that he could shoot people in midtown Manhattan and get away with it.
” Other than that, he governed as a Liberal”
Oh please!
You mean the 2017 Tax Cut and Jobs Act which cost $1.9 trillion and broadly favored corporations and the wealthiest Americans was a “Liberal” idea.
I also guess Trump’s attempt to repeal Obamacare, only losing because John McCain had a conscience, was also “Liberal.” In fact, Trump tried his hardest to roll back health care insurance for the poorest Americans. Not exactly a “Liberal”position.
This is not to mention Trump’s support of deregulating corporations that regularly pollute our communities. Liberal? Probably not. Trump also increased the U.S. military budget by more than 25% during his presidency. Well intentioned or not, probably not something most “Liberals” would favor.
Tony, I’m sure you’re a very smart man in most aspects of your life, but, really, Trump was “Liberal”? You must have recently been partaking in the wacky weed they sell in this county.