HOW BAD ARE TRUMP’S CRIMES?

 

                                …Trump’s crimes prove he is not above the law

 

Just how far should the DOJ go against Trump?

 

The January 6^th hearings have shown that some advisers told President Trump that he’d lost the election and that he should concede.  He was also hearing the opposite from his lawyers: Rudy Giuliani, John Eastman, Sidney Powell and the rest of the gang that came to be known as “Team Crazy”.

Trump’s reliance on Team Crazy’s advice could persuade a jury that he truly believed the election had been stolen.  That would be a “strong defense” said  Jonathan Turley in The Hill.

However, Edward Luce in The Financial Times, says the DOJ just needs to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt.  But the jurors, also know the defendant “Retains the devotion of millions of Americans, and many of them are armed.”

The Attorney General, Merrick Garland can take the pressure off the jury, said Rebecca Beitsh and Harper Neidig in The Hill, by focusing on specific, concrete crimes where Trump’s guilt will be easy to prove.  Even if Trump honestly thought the election was stolen, for example, that wouldn’t change the fact that he tried to “obstruct an official proceeding”: the Congress’ certification of the vote.  That’s a crime for which hundreds of Capital rioters have already been convicted.  The “easiest path” to a conviction, said Chris Strohm in Bloomberg.com, could also be to charge Trump for his role in submitting lists of “fake electors” from seven swing states.  Forgery and document fraud are everyday crimes that the public understands and for which people are imprisoned on a daily basis.

But, “No” said Charlie Sykes in The Bulwark.  Garland should “go as big as possible.”  The MAGA faithful are going to react with total fury to any prosecution of their “Orange God King,” so Garland may as well bring charges that reflect the gravity of his attempted coup: “seditious conspiracy, fraud, obstruction, and incitement.”  Failing to charge Trump with crimes would prove presidents are above the law, said Kimberly Atkins Stohr in The Boston Globe.  That precedent has already been set by the absence of legal consequence for previous presidents who committed apparent crimes, including Warren Harding, Richard Nixon, and Bill Clinton.  It falls to the mild-mannered Garland to now end that toxic tradition. 

“Our future as  nation depends on it.”

Copyright G. Ater 2022