I WAS shocked to see in a recent poll here that some people think Trump did not get a fair trial in the New York prosecution for felony falsification of documents. Either the persons responding to the poll don’t have any idea of what constitutes a fair trial, don’t know the panoply of rights and protections American jurisprudence provides to criminal defendants, or have been drinking the Kool-Aid of disinformation from Fox News and other right-wing media and Trump himself.
Of course Trump is going to say the system is rigged against him. He has been saying this since he was born with a silver spoon in his mouth. Billionaire, white guy, American citizen. How unfair life has been to him! But back to the trial. What possible claims of unfairness can there be? And what is the truth?
1) Corrupt Joe Biden is prosecuting Donald Trump, his political rival.
This is nonsense because the case in New York was a state case, not a federal case. In the U.S., we have a system called federalism, where the federal government operates to ensure justice and prosecute federal crimes and the state governments operate their own judicial systems. In the CNMI we have a U.S. federal court; and we have the CNMI judiciary. This is federalism. The U.S. Attorney who brings cases in federal court is NOT the same as the CNMI Attorney General who brings CNMI cases in our judiciary. In the New York case against Trump, the Manhattan Attorney General brought charges against Trump based on violations of New York criminal law. Joe Biden had nothing to do with it.
2) George Soros funded Alvin Bragg, so the Manhattan Attorney General is corrupt.
This is Trump’s dog-whistle to his neo-Nazi, white nationalist supporters. George Soros is Jewish, and the claim is merely to alert the anti-Semites and racists to attack Bragg, who is a black American. Political candidates, including those for attorney general positions, do get funding from donors. This is not illegal. It is not a sign of corruption. It is not a sign of favoritism, bias or prejudice.
Soros is a billionaire who donates to Democratic candidates and human rights causes in America and around the world. He did not donate directly to Bragg and never met the man. He did donate to a Democratic fund that helped support Bragg in his election. And none of this has anything to do with the decision by the Manhattan DA to prosecute, which as explained over and over again by Bragg and his office was based on evidence and law.
3) Judge Merchan was unfair and prejudiced against Trump.
Judge Juan Merchan is a well-respected judge in New York City. Trump sought to have him removed from the case because Merchan donated $35 to Biden’s 2020 campaign. This was deemed a minor issue and not grounds for recusal. Trump has screamed loudly that Merchan’s daughter works for a political consulting /advertising firm that gets Democrat clients who pay large fees. Merchan, in an abundance of caution, raised the question whether his daughter’s position for the company compromised him before Trump even mentioned it: in May 2023 Merchan sought a ruling from the New York State Advisory Committee on Judicial Ethics on the matter. He followed their advice, which held that under New York judicial ethics, the Trump case did not involve Merchan’s family; “no parties or likely witnesses who were clients of the daughter were before the judge, etc. Nothing in the case’s outcome could have an effect on the judge’s relative, the relative’s business, or any of their interests.” Trump’s prior attorney Joe Tacopina, very experienced in New York City, had also said before he stopped representing Trump that he saw no conflict for Judge Merchan and no reason to fear bias or prejudice from him.
And by the way, Judge Merchan’s wife works for a Republican District Attorney at the Nassau County office.
And another by-the-way: Trump appealed the issue of Judge Merchan’s non-recusal to the mid-level appellate division in New York and they upheld Judge Merchan’s decision. There was no good cause to remove Judge Merchan from presiding in the case.
4. The charges are bogus and don’t make sense and Trump doesn’t even know what he’s charged with.
This, too, is a foolish claim promoted by Trump whining and complaining. The charges were in writing. They were explicit and cite to the New York statutory law that was alleged to have been violated. There have been many other felony indictments and convictions on the same charges throughout New York before the case against Trump was ever brought. (In May 2023, the New York Times published a sample of about 30 such cases.)
5. He couldn’t get a fair jury.
This is not true. Both prosecution and defense have UNLIMITED challenges to jurors for cause. If there is any reason to believe a juror is unfair, biased, prejudiced or unable to sit in fair deliberation of the crime or of the defendant, either party can object. It doesn’t matter if they’ve objected to one hundred or one thousand or one million other jurors. For-cause-objections are unlimited. And the twelve jurors who eventually were selected were approved by both prosecution and defense. None of them were challenged for cause because there was no basis to believe any of them could not be fair.
6. The venue was unfair —Trump couldn’t be treated fairly in New York.
Todd Blanche said on media appearances after the trial that Trump couldn’t get a fair trial in New York because he was too well known there. This is laughable. Trump is well-known everywhere in America! There isn’t any place where he wouldn’t be known.
There is no right to have a venue where people share your political views or religious beliefs or cultural values or educational knowledge or any such things. A jury of peers simply means a jury of other US citizens. We are all equal politically.
The trial was in New York because that’s where the crimes were committed. That’s how our criminal justice system works.
7. There was an unfair gag order.
When you’re charged with a crime, you have to comply with terms of release and other rules of the Court. The Court, in this case, issued an order to protect law enforcement personnel, witnesses and potential and actual jurors from intimidation or other attacks by Trump. This is a reasonable order. Trump appealed it to a mid-level appeal and the order was upheld. Trump was never denied his first amendment rights to speak. He spoke every day. He was on social media repeatedly.
He was sanctioned for violating the order because he kept attacking people who were supposed to be protected from his verbal vitriol. None of this was unfair to Trump. In fact, he was treated with kid-gloves. I can tell you in my experience and strong opinion that there is no judge in the CNMI that would let a criminal defendant violate a court order issued for protection of persons NINE times without putting that criminal defendant in jail at some point in the process. Trump got fined. And continues to violate the gag order. He may face more sanctions.
8. The Court was cold.
Okay. The building is old. We, too, have cold courtrooms in the CNMI. After the first day, Trump would know to wear a vest or a sweater or layers under his suit. This is just whining and complaining because Trump is always casting himself as a victim.
Not to mention, everyone in the courtroom experienced the same temperature.
9. It was a witch hunt! Or political!
Generally, we think of witch hunts as made-up allegations that have no factual basis. Looking for witches — because real witches don’t exist — is considered persecution of the innocent. The accusation it is political is similar — motivated by politics, so it must not be true.
In this case, there were five weeks of testimony from witnesses. All of the witnesses were in Trump’s world, not conjured from among his enemies. He did business with David Pecker. He hired Michael Cohen as his attorney and fixer. Stormy Daniels was in his personal contacts list, as described by Trump’s longtime secretary/assistant. Hope Hicks worked for Trump. Other witnesses came from businesses to validate Trump’s tweets, his e-mails, his phone messages, his statements on various media platforms. There were documents.
In a witch hunt, there is no time to consider whether the fabricated evidence of witchcraft is real. In political attacks, lies may sometimes be used (and are now de rigueur by MAGA, despite fact-checking). But in a trial, Trump had rights — to counsel, to confrontation of the witnesses, to present his own evidence. Trump had three well-respected, experienced attorneys: Todd Blanche, Emil Bove, and Susan Necheles. His attorneys cross-examined the witnesses against him. They called their own witnesses. These constitutional protections are very real and strong help to a fair process. Trump had the benefit of these constitutional protections. And the jury’s job was to decide what to believe, what was truthful, what was real. Not a witch hunt. And political or not, there had to real and convincing evidence.
10. He couldn’t testify! He wanted to but the system wouldn’t let him.
This is an outright lie. Trump was informed by Judge Merchan very clearly that he had the right to testify and that the right to testify was his decision alone. His attorneys do not make the decision on whether Trump testifies. They can advise him, but ultimately Trump decides.
And Trump did decide.
The system in New York is so fair to the criminal defendant that Trump was informed ahead of time what areas of his past could be asked about if he chose to testify. The prosecutors had to let him know what they wanted to ask him about. And Judge Merchan let him know what they could ask and what they couldn’t.
Trump thought it was unfair that if he lied, he could be cross-examined on his lies! He didn’t like that his own tweets and posts and public speeches could be used to cross-examine him. But this is not unfair. It is just more Trump whining.
11. The evidence from Stormy Daniels was too salacious and shouldn’t have been let in.
Well, there is some truth to this — recognizing that her testimony was salacious (although not sure if it was “too” salacious). But that it shouldn’t have been let in is wrong. Todd Blanche, in his opening statement, said categorically that Trump denied ever having sex with Stormy Daniels. This was a direct attack on her credibility. It required the prosecution to shore up her testimony and credibility.
One of the most common and well-known ways to establish credibility is to elicit details. When people are lying, they often talk in generalities. So Stormy Daniels going into detail was necessitated by the defense denial and may be considered as “invited error.” When a defendant invites error, he doesn’t get to complain about the error later.
And the defense didn’t object to the questions! The judge has no way of knowing what the defense thinks or why they might want some evidence to come in. At one point, the Judge on his own, did stop Stormy Daniels from going further into details, worried and wondering why the defense wasn’t objecting! The fact the judge didn’t do the defense job for them throughout did not make the trial unfair. Defense could have objected and the judge may have sustained the objections. But the evidence that came in without objection is properly in evidence, however salacious or not.
12. The whole system is rigged.
Trump had the full panoply of rights our Constitution guarantees to all criminal defendants.
He was indicted by a grand jury — independent people listening to evidence and deciding there was probably cause that a crime was committed and Trump did it.
He was arrested on the written indictment, put on notice.
Throughout the process, he had counsel.
He had a public trial: had the right to confront witnesses, had the right to present his own evidence, had the right to remain silent and not have any negative inferences of his not testifying used against him. He had a presumption of innocence until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. He had a jury of twelve peers, who decided the verdicts unanimously.
The American justice system can be slow. It can be cumbersome. It is not perfect. But it is not a witch hunt. This was not a banana republic travesty like the “disappeared.” Nothing was unfair about this. Nothing was “rigged” against Trump.
We have a good reason to trust the verdict of the jurors. They were there. They listened to all the testimony. They saw the witnesses. They examined the documents and other evidence. They heard the jury instructions about the law.
And now that Trump is a convicted felon, he has the right to appeal! Which is also proof that this is a fair process.
Political supporters of Trump may have trouble accepting the verdict because it conflicts with their concept of the former President and candidate. But he is a convicted felon on 34 felony charges that he falsified business records in furtherance of other criminal activity. He had a fair trial process under the American (and I think best) judicial system we have to offer.
The next steps in the process involve Trump meeting with probation officers for their interview to prepare the pre-sentence report. He will undergo a psychological examination. They will do background checks on him. And submit their report. Sentencing is set for July 11.
The crimes he committed are Class E felonies in New York, which is the lowest felony grade. Jail is possible, but not required. With Trump, we will have to wait and see what sentence he is given.
He will appeal, no matter what the sentence. So we know the process will take longer for ultimate justice to prevail. But it must be said-whatever the poll results are-Convicted felon Trump got a fair trial in New York City. And the on-going appeal process, although slow, is fair and just.
