| Informative note from DP.net: Former president Trump is accused of paying $130,000 to silence Stormy Daniels, a porn star who claims to have had an affair with him. District Attorney Bragg alleges that he may have falsified records about the money, a misdemeanor under New York law. However, the allegations go much further to turn the act into a felony when there is intent to commit or conceal another crime. In this case, the second crime to be proved would be if Trump took an illegal and undeclared campaign contribution in the form of hush money. Here are the facts: In 2016, Stormy Daniels contacted the National Enquirer through a representative to offer the story of her affair with Trump. Days before the 2016 election, Michael Cohen gave the porn actress $130,000 through a shell company after she agreed to keep silent. Trump gave Cohen $420,000 for his effort listing them as legal expenses. Federal prosecutors later charged Cohen for his role in the scheme, and he pleaded guilty to various charges, including violation of campaign finance law. He admitted all of this information in the process, accusing Trump of directing his actions. Years later Bragg has just persuaded a grand jury that the former president, too, likely broke the law in paying off Daniels. |
The case is too uncertain and technical to deliver the clarity America needs.
New York, March 30.– After so much speculation that it seemed America’s media might have just been repeating echoes, a grand jury has indeed indicted the 45th president of the United States. This is—to use a term that was worn out by the end of the Trump administration—historic. No president has been indicted before. Nor will this be the last of the indictments Mr. Trump faces.
For another politician, it would signal the end of a political career. In Mr. Trump’s case, the question is to what extent a prosecution will act as fuel for a movement that seemed to be flagging. Mr. Trump has been fundraising for weeks on the back of his impending indictment, which he predicted was coming on social media on March 18th. It turns out to have been one of his more accurate posts.
After so much speculation that it seemed America’s media might have just been repeating echoes, a grand jury has indeed indicted the 45th president of the United States. This is—to use a term that was worn out by the end of the Trump administration—historic. No president has been indicted before. Nor will this be the last of the indictments Mr. Trump faces.
For another politician, it would signal the end of a political career. In Mr. Trump’s case, the question is to what extent a prosecution will act as fuel for a movement that seemed to be flagging. Mr. Trump has been fundraising for weeks on the back of his impending indictment, which he predicted was coming on social media on March 18th. It turns out to have been one of his more accurate posts.
If Mr. Trump has committed a crime it would be wrong to duck prosecuting him only because that would put stress on America’s governing institutions. Other countries have successfully prosecuted former presidents and prime ministers: think of Silvio Berlusconi in Italy or Nicolas Sarkozy in France. America should not endorse Richard Nixon’s view that if a president or a presidential candidate does it, then it’s OK.
Treating a former president like any other citizen cuts both ways, though. Prosecutors like the Manhattan district attorney (DA) have discretion when deciding which cases to bring. They must weigh the seriousness of the crime, the likelihood of securing a conviction, and the public interest in prosecuting. That last part is the most contentious ...
[ Full text ]