Trump pleads not-guilty in election interference case

By: Asa Montreaux

The reality is it had seemed Donald Trump had escaped his most inconspicuous charges, the shameful incitements to riot, that caused the massive riot and protest against the election results on Jan. 21, 2021.

But what if those charges could be revised. What if, the new immunity ruling by the Supreme Court of The United States, was nothing that prevented charging the president in this case? If the incitements to riot could be considered related to a public function, revisiting the initial crime would surely produce more charges.

It most certainly had, and charges are renewed against President Trump. It only took a simple revising by the Attorney General, and the charges still stand.

There was obviously a high level of illegality in posting repetitively, and speaking repetitively about the supposed fraudulent nature of the results. Actually interfering with the election, calling governors, trying to reverse results, was clearly a serious felony.

And what was the relation of these actions to the public office? They are removed from said office by an arm and a leg. These actions did not further the interest of the public, or even purport to. They fulfilled no public function, but only serviced to gain the former President what he would want.

With an official ruling on if Presidential immunity has any relevance whatsoever in this case looming, the anxiety is high surrounding the trial. The first part of a ruling will be delivered just before the election, even within days before voters hit the polls. Thus they will go to the polls dramatically affected by this result. It is interesting that the trial will not be affected by the election at all, indicating a high level of procedural fairness. With the other results lying sometime after the election has come and gone, there is a counterbalance in which the results of the trial will represent some of the election hype, and also none of it. So that, regardless of the result, both parties have received at least half of what they had sought. 

*

Former President Trump’s hush money trial, a simultaneously occurring legal battle, has actually been pushed back to after the election. It was scheduled for September 18. 

The outcome of this trial seemed to Judge Juan Merchan, and to others, to not bear significance in relation to the election itself. Whereas Trump is being hit with the election charges as we speak, these charges are certainly of a private matter, and previously they have upheld a test of being within the realm of personal matters, not meeting the criteria of functions of the public office of President. 

The nature of these charges involves a well-documented, and lambasted, aspect of Donald Trump’s personality – his sleezy womaning. He has over the course of many years shown the coarseness, and distastefulness of one buying sex with money. He was famously audiotaped saying almost whatever he wanted about the female kind, displaying a level of sexism which had significantly impacted his failed bid for re-election. Perhaps that behavior is something people need a reminder of before the latest re-election bid of his.

Judge Juan Merchan stated in his decision, that the case demands "a sentencing hearing that is entirely focused on the verdict of the jury".

He continued, "Their verdict must be respected and addressed in a manner that is not diluted by the enormity of the upcoming presidential election," he said, setting sentencing to exactly three weeks after the November 5th election.

He said the delay was necessary "to avoid any appearance - however unwarranted - that the proceeding has been affected by or seeks to affect the approaching presidential election in which the Defendant is a candidate”.

It may be a valid complaint that the election will unduly influence the trial. Though a more nuanced analysis would reveal that Trump would be the beneficiary of good results if he were leading the polls. His adamance for a sentencing delay comes now, as his ratings have dipped into decidedly second place in the last few weeks.

The prosecution does obviously not intend to influence the election. Though Judge Merchan’s ruling does to some extent reflect a real possibility that the trial will influence the election. This is not the aim of a court of law, and its impact on political events, and events of any other part of the government, should be limited. 

Judge Merchan stated, “The Court is a fair, impartial and apolitical institution.” The Judge in this decision aims to not influence the political realm of the government, and the governmental process of the election is ensured by these kinds of moves.

But at what cost? With some indications Former President Trump will receive jail time, as critics predict he will see at least some of the four years maximum jail time when the sentencing does arrive. Would that be a result of this decision, that he would be a President sitting in a jail cell, while something akin to the governmental shutdown he initiated during his Presidency, is taking place? Would he allow the government to run without him from jail?

Why is it some individuals think he will not face jail time when he has been found guilty, and on so many counts? If you think about it, it is probably his past tendency to seek legal recourse through unconventional tactics. It seems often there is no expense he won’t spare, as if he had believed all his life he could do whatever he wanted, as long as he had enough money to get out of it. Is this what we are witnessing? The man that request moves to other courts, request delays, elects to not show up in person, countersues… the man that appeals…

Will appeal a decision that sends him to prison. If elected president, he will be out on bail, trying to carry out the daily tasks required to run the country, and advancing his controversial agenda. He will delay and delay his appeal, and if he loses this trial, he will obviously apply to the Supreme Court. 

In this event, does the man who thought he could do anything have a get out of jail free card? Is the heavily conservative-slanted Supreme Court list of Justices destined to let him off? It surely is.

Were the fatal moves to elect Conservative justice after Conservative Justice, despite all complaints and problems, the moves that ensured his freedom?

We will have to wait to find out.