Trump Guilty On All Counts

David Thornton

David Thornton is a freelance writer and professional pilot who has also lived in Georgia, Florida, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Texas. He is a graduate of the University of Georgia and Emmanuel College. He is Christian conservative/libertarian who was fortunate enough to have seen Ronald Reagan in person during his formative years. A former contributor to The Resurgent, David now writes for the Racket News with fellow Resurgent alum, Steve Berman, and his personal blog, CaptainKudzu. He currently lives with his wife and daughter near Columbus, Georgia. His son is serving in the US Air Force. You can find him on Twitter @CaptainKudzu and Facebook.

Related Post Roulette

30 Responses

  1. Jaybird
    Ignored
    says:

    On the other hand, undecided and independent voters are a different story. There is polling to suggest that a Trump conviction would sway some voters. An April CNN poll and a May Emerson poll both showed that about a quarter of voters might be less inclined to support Trump if he was convicted. More recently, a PBS Newshour/NPR/Marist poll found that 11 percent of independents and even 10 percent of Republicans would be less likely to vote for a convicted Trump. That’s not a lot, but the election is close and it matters.

    This is where the rubber meets the road, innit?

    If the undecideds see this as an absolute indictment of Trump, Trump is toast. “We ought to have nominated DeSantis!”, folks could yell. “He’s worse than Trump”, a handful of others could point out.

    If the undecideds see this as an indictment of the system? Who knows what might happen?

    I’m going to pay attention to the numbers this summer.

    Not that polling means anything.Report

    • Glyph in reply to Jaybird
      Ignored
      says:

      “Undecideds”, eh? I wouldn’t have thought there were enough coma patients in America to swing the election; or that they were able to answer poll questions, for that matter.

      (Hiya JB!)Report

      • Jaybird in reply to Glyph
        Ignored
        says:

        Hi, Glyph!

        I am using “undecideds” in a couple of ways.

        1. Buridan’s Ass. (But instead of two desireable things, two vaguely undesirable things.)
        2. Undecided between “not voting” and “voting”.

        I assume that there are only a handful of people who are ignorantly undecided…

        Wait. There are still a bunch of people who, come July, will not have heard that Trump was found guilty. Oh my gosh. Surely not… but we will hear that, won’t we. “Oh, you’re making that up!”, they’ll say. BECAUSE THEY NEVER HEARD ABOUT IT.

        I will never be that happy.

        Anyway, my assumption is that there are undecideds who are doing the Buridan’s Ass thing as well as people who are undecided when it comes to voting at all.

        And I have no idea how this shifts the undecideds.Report

      • Chip Daniels in reply to Glyph
        Ignored
        says:

        Over at LGM they have coined the term “Ariana Grande voter” for the low information apolitical people who know who Ariana Grande is but can’t name the candidates for President.

        And while for us political junkies it seems inconceivable, these people are pretty widespread.
        With the death of traditional newspapers and network news, their information diet is TikTok, Twitter, Buzzfeed, and maybe the aggregate feed bundled with most browsers.

        When we talk about “undecided” voters we mistakenly think these are people without fixed convictions, or people who have deeply studied the issues and candidates and just can’t seem to make up their minds.

        Most of them I think are people with strong opinions and policy preferences but who just follow politics the way I follow sports which is not at all, like seriously I have no idea who won the Superbowl or World Series.

        Something like this, that leads with every headline for days is the sort of thing that can break through the din and reach those people. And a conviction isn’t a “he said/she said” thing, it isn’t a “Here’s 5 wonky opinions on inflation rates and why it matters”, a criminal conviction is something that is easily understood.

        I don’t know how many votes this by itself will move, but it will be one factor.Report

      • Saul Degraw in reply to Glyph
        Ignored
        says:

        There are always undecideds somewhere.

        IIRC there is some interesting cross-tabs in the polling which persistently gives bide a lead of plus 4 to plus 9 among likely voters/people who voted in 2020 or 2022 but Trump retains a solid lead among registered voters/general population/not sure how to phrase it.

        I think a theory here is Paul Campos’ Ariana Grande Theory of Politics. The average voter knows about as much about politics as Paul Campos, a man in his mid-60s with rocker sensibilities knows about Ariana Grande. I.e. they know who the President is and that is about it. Accordingly, everything bad in the United States is blamed on the President. Inflation? It is Joe Biden’s fault? Tje Dobbs decision? Joe Biden was President when it happened, it is his fault. Etc.Report

      • Saul Degraw in reply to Glyph
        Ignored
        says:

        There are also people threatening to tank “Genocide Joe” over Gaza but I am doubtful they will have a substantive effectReport

    • InMD in reply to Jaybird
      Ignored
      says:

      I think chances of people looking at this as an indictment of the system are pretty low. That’s of course how Trump will play it, but this is where I think we get into MAGA and conservatives generally failing to take a step back and consider how this sounds to someone without their commitments and personal emotional investments. I believe you’ve called this a failure to have a theory of mind in context of certain strains of progressive activism. This doesn’t mean that Trump can’t win. He absolutely still can. But for this to be viewed as an indictment of the system, at least in a way that matters, you’d have to believe that Joe or Jane Normie in the Phoenix or Milwaukee suburbs are convinced, or ready to be convinced, that Donald Trump personally is the victim of a massive conspiracy. Maybe I’ll be proven wrong, but that seems about as likely to me as those same people deciding it would be a great idea to dismantle the local police department.Report

  2. Pinky
    Ignored
    says:

    I’m terrible at predicting voters’ reactions in general. As for this situation, I don’t think anyone knows how the electorate will react. Like, if everyone guesses, some will be right and more will pretend they’re right, but the good guesses won’t be based on better insight.Report

    • InMD in reply to Pinky
      Ignored
      says:

      You’re being a killjoy. This is the perfect opportunity for us all to make the wildest prognostications we can come up with then try to weasel out of them later.Report

    • North in reply to Pinky
      Ignored
      says:

      The preponderance of probability seems to be a toss up, in my mind, between a mild boost to Biden and no effect with a major boost to Biden being a distant third and it being varying degrees of benefit to Trump as rounding error probability fourth and fifth tier outcomes.Report

    • Marchmaine in reply to Pinky
      Ignored
      says:

      Yeah, I certainly don’t have the finger on the pulse of, of, well, anything.

      But I think back on Trump’s claim that he could shoot someone on 5th avenue and not lose any votes and I always thought he’d lose some votes. Maybe not all the votes, but some.

      Now as I ponder whether he could do misdemeanor accounting fraud in connection with another unprosecuted felony on 5th avenue and not lose any votes? Well, maybe.Report

  3. Philip H
    Ignored
    says:

    I’ll start by noting it is a very sad day that a former President of the United States now stands a convicted felon. Sort of take the wind out of the American exceptionalism argument.

    Next, we turn to the GOP. This is the absolute last off ramp for conservatives to take back the GOP if they really want to. After this, if he remains the head of the party, they will deserve every crime syndicate analogy lobbed at them.

    Finally the election – of the 10% or so of voters whom NPR termed “Double Doubters” this morning, a trump conviction begins to weigh the scale in one direction. Once he is sentenced it may tilt more. Unfortunately this case doesn’t really address his economic or democratic threats, but it may give people not paying attention to those issues a reason to walk. Of course, it would help if the media had accurately described this case as something other then a hush money case.

    This also highlights however that Democrats have to bring their A+ game to the campaign trail right through election day. Since we won’t have federal convictions by then, they need to hammer a lot of other drums.Report

    • Dark Matter in reply to Philip H
      Ignored
      says:

      Does he get to be free while he’s appealing this? If not then the convention will need to be scheduled around him being in jail. If so, then his plan is unchanged. Get elected and dismantle the rule of law.

      Mechanically I’m not sure the GOP can get rid of him at this point.

      That’s fine, he’ll run and lose badly and deserve to.Report

      • Philip H in reply to Dark Matter
        Ignored
        says:

        MY understanding is he remains free until sentencing on the bond he initially posted. Beyond that I have no idea.Report

      • North in reply to Dark Matter
        Ignored
        says:

        I’m not deeply familiar with the GOP’s internal election methods. I do know they have no form of “superdelegates” so what would have to happen would be something akin to faithless elector behavior on the part of the delegates Trump has earned via winning all of his primaries. That’s highly unlikely considering that those delegates, themselves, are Trumpists- moreover if they did defect then the outcome would be something that could be litigated and it would, assuredly, sunder the Republican Party for, at least, this election and could lead to a wipe out. So in legal and practical terms I don’t see how the Republicans would be willing or able to get rid of Trump unless he voluntarily bows out.

        I do think, though, this may influence Trumps’ Veep choice in that he’ll, more than ever, want a highly loyal and not enormously strong (as a free standing politician) candidate to minimize the odds that anyone tries to get rid of him.Report

      • InMD in reply to Dark Matter
        Ignored
        says:

        Not sure on NY but where I am licensed you can ask for a stay of execution of a sentence during the appeal. Up to the trial judge whether to grant it.Report

  4. Derek S
    Ignored
    says:

    This trail did something I thought I would never do again. First, actively root for Trump to win the election (not just resign myself to the better of two terrible choices). Second, give money to his campaign again (did in 2016, didn’t in 2020, now back to giving, sigh).

    This level Lawfair against an single person reminds me of the sham trails in China and Iran. When did the US fall so low?Report

  5. Saul Degraw
    Ignored
    says:

    It is very hard of me to conceive how this is bad or a wash for Joe Biden/the Democrats. Trump has been labeled a convicted felon and now his rants and raves have not been kept to Truth Social. The GOP is beclowning itself too in condemning the verdict and the process.Report

    • pillsy in reply to Saul Degraw
      Ignored
      says:

      Yeah, while I’m sure this will provide a bit of a lift to Trump on the Right out of anger at the idea that the law might bind a member of the in-group, everything else would seem to push the other way.

      I’m going to srake out the following bold contrarian stance: “This major party nominee was just convicted of a bunch of felonies for trying to cover up a really sleazy affair,” is not a good story for that nominee or that party.

      Will it sway diehards of either the partisan GOP or Trumpist variety? Nyah.

      But it makes it hard for the GOP and the Trump campaign to talk about things that it is helpful for them to talk about while providing a stellar excuse for Democrats and the Biden campaign to not talk about things they don’t want to talk about.

      It also puts a lot of pressure on a candidate who is not particularly known for being disciplined and staying on message at the best of times. He’ll be (even more) seething and vengeful and there will be more focus on that then there was before.Report

      • Michael Cain in reply to pillsy
        Ignored
        says:

        One of the next steps is supposed to be an investigation by the probation department, including an interview with Trump. That department will make a sentence recommendation to the judge. I would pay to watch that interview.Report

  6. Jaybird
    Ignored
    says:

    NY Magazine has an article out that is somewhat critical of the trial, for some reason: Prosecutors Got Trump — But They Contorted the Law.

    “No man is above the law.” It’s become cliché, but it’s an important point, and it’s worth pausing to reflect on the importance of this core principle. But it’s also meaningless pablum if we unquestioningly tolerate (or worse, celebrate) deviations from ordinary process and principle to get there. The jury’s word is indeed sacrosanct, as I learned long ago. But it can’t fix everything that preceded it. Here, prosecutors got their man, for now at least — but they also contorted the law in an unprecedented manner in their quest to snare their prey.

    The whole article criticizes all sorts of stuff.

    Makes you wonder about her secret motivations.Report

    • pillsy in reply to Jaybird
      Ignored
      says:

      Makes you wonder about her secret motivations.

      Elie Honig is a dude, and I don’t see any reason to believe he has secret motivations beyond, perhaps, the underlying need that professional commentators have to drive engagement through takes that are, well, not lukewarm. In particular, I don’t think the guy who wrote a book trashing Bill Barr for his partisan shenanigans at the Justice Department is a MAGA hack or something.

      But does that mean his argument is persuasive? Well, uh, no. For all that one might assume he’s going for some kind of exciting take, the whole piece does little to deviate from the broader “Alvin Bragg is being too mean to Trump” genre.[1]

      The broader genre is rooted in the idea that because charges are a novel application of the law, they must be somehow unjust or unprincipled, and this piece, like so many others, really fails to explain why this is so. I generally believe it isn’t, because:

      1. Trump was doing something that is actually obviously illegal — falsifying business records. This is at least a misdemeanor, and while you can say many things about misdemeanors, they tautologically not legal. And while it’s not quite a tautology, I don’t think the fact that falsifying business records is surprising. Like, yeah, you shouldn’t be doing that and the state has an obvious interest in stopping you from doing that.

      2. The business records were falsified as part of an egregiously sleazy and corrupt scheme to aide Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign, and one which got a ton of public attention. It’s not like Trump is being charged in relation to innocuous behavior here.

      3. It looks like the argument that this was done to break other laws is, well, correct and well-founded in the evidence presented.

      Has anybody been charged like this before? Probably not, but it could also be that no one has really given a DA before thius cause to charge them like this by engaging in this particular sort of illegal and corrupt conduct. Without some additional argument about how the charges go beyond unusual to being unjust, I really don’t see the issue.

      [1] There’s one piece in there about how long it took the prosecution to specify which NY state election laws Trump might have broken that could have merit, but seems to vitiate Honig’s objection to basing felony charges on Trump’s intent to violate Federal election law.Report

  7. Chip Daniels
    Ignored
    says:

    Republicans join Trump’s attacks on justice system and campaign of vengeance after guilty verdict

    WASHINGTON (AP) — Embracing Donald Trump’s strategy of blaming the U.S. justice system after his historic guilty verdict, Republicans in Congress are fervently enlisting themselves in his campaign of vengeance and political retribution as the GOP runs to reclaim the White House.

    Almost no Republican official has stood up to suggest Trump should not be the party’s presidential candidate for the November election — in fact, some have sought to hasten his nomination. Few others dared to defend the legitimacy of the New York state court that heard the hush money case or the 12 jurors who unanimously rendered their verdict.

    And those Republicans who expressed doubts about Trump’s innocence or political viability, including his former hawkish national security adviser John Bolton or top-tier Senate candidate Larry Hogan of Maryland, were instantly bullied by the former president’s enforcers and told to “leave the party.”

    https://apnews.com/article/trump-guilty-republicans-vengeance-a05db7fa2512a62afe035992f2baaf16

    Trump could die tomorrow and the cancerous tumor on our republic would still need to be dealt with.Report

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *