• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • My Social Media
  • About
    • About Mark Draughn
    • Other Authors
      • About Gary Olson
      • About Ken Gibson
      • About Joel Rosenberg
    • Disclosures
    • Terms and Conditions

Windypundit

Classical liberalism, criminal laws, the war on drugs, economics, free speech, technology, photography, sex work, cats, and whatever else comes to mind.

Putting the Trump Indictment Into Perspective

April 1, 2023 By Mark Draughn 2 Comments

On the one hand, indicting Donald Trump for paying hush money to Stormy Daniels seems like small change. On the other hand, I sure do enjoy when bad things happen to Donald Trump. On yet another hand, however, it bothered me that this indictment seemed like a real stretch, which lends credence to the claims by MAGA folks that it’s politically-motivated. However much I despise Trump, I don’t want to encourage an abuse of prosecutorial power.

Then I came across a random tweet from a total stranger that managed to put it all in perspective:

The weirdest part about Trump being indicted for fraud, is that he was once President.

Tgage @tgagemurphy — 4:40 PM · Mar 31, 2023

Once you see it, it seems so obvious.

If Trump had wiped out early in the Republican primary, the story here would be about a rich New York real estate developer and New Jersey casino owner who got indicted for some shady business dealings. As a news story, that’s about as dog-bites-man as it gets. The subsequent legal wrangling might get good coverage by the New York media, but most Americans wouldn’t even know it was going on. Maybe some late-night comedians that tape in New York would do three or four jokes on it.[1]If Donald Trump hadn’t also been a well-known reality TV performer, his indictment would be a purely local story.

Without the shine of the Presidency, Trump would be just a shady real estate developer/casino owner who’s been getting away with doing shady shit his entire life because he’s rich, politically connected, and surrounded by sacrificial lackeys. That he finally got hit with criminal charges would surprise no one. The most outrageous thing about his indictment is that it hadn’t happened earlier.

Related

Footnotes

Footnotes
↑1If Donald Trump hadn’t also been a well-known reality TV performer, his indictment would be a purely local story.
Share This Post

Filed Under: Political Science

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. Humble Talent says

    April 6, 2023 at 9:23 am

    This case is bizarre.

    It’s not illegal to pay off a mistress and have it go under an NDA. NDAs exist for literally this kind of thing. It’s not even illegal to write off your NDA money as a tax write off… It is legitimately a legal expense. It *might* be illegal for a politician to write off an NDA with a mistress in proximity to a campaign, because there is an argument that the politician’s campaign would suffer were the information about the mistress to surface.

    There are things you’d have to look at like how close to the campaign the NDA was signed, whether previous NDAs had been signed, whether the public knowledge of the affair would actually hurt the politician (It was during the campaign, there were, and it didn’t.).

    But if you feel like this is a case you can win, which isn’t impossible: Juries do all kinds of weird things, and sometimes you just gotta shoot your shot, this in particular might be rough:

    “The most outrageous thing about his indictment is that it hadn’t happened earlier.”

    Like…. Within the statute of limitations earlier. The statute of limitations for a misdemeanor (which this really was) is two years. The statute of limitations for a felony (which Bragg has somehow morphed this into) is five. The payment was made in 2016, the taxes were filed in 2017.It is 2023. It’s almost like DA Bragg waited until his case had as little a chance at success as possible before filing it.

    Or he waited until it would have as much political impact as possible.

    Just saying. It won’t surprise me if Trump ends up convicted of crimes. I’m not opposed to him being convicted of crimes. He generally acts like he believes laws are for little people, and that ought to end up biting him eventually. However, this case ain’t it, and he has good reason to think that laws are for little people, based on the actions of law enforcement.

    Reply
  2. Mark Draughn says

    April 10, 2023 at 12:28 pm

    Interesting comment, as usual.

    As I understand it, under New York law, the statute of limitations clock can stop running when the subject is outside of the jurisdiction of New York, as Trump has been. At least that’s what Bragg is arguing. I guess we’ll see if that works. And it’s a felony, according to Bragg, because it was covering up another crime, a campaign finance violation… a campaign finance violation at the federal level, which the feds have declined to prosecute Trump for…like you say, it’s a mess.

    I wrote this post because I find the “indicting a former President is unprecedented” argument less than convincing. For one thing, it proves too much: You could make the same argument if Trump was credibly accused of murder, and presumably no one agrees he should get away with that. Also, I suspect there’s probably a few former Presidents that should have been indicted, and that’s the real injustice. My point here, however, was that “former President indicted” may be unprecedented, but “former New York real estate developer indicted” is not, and there’s no reason the former should override the latter.

    All that said… I never liked Trump, I’ve long thought him a sociopath, and in the last few years I’ve developed a furious hatred for the guy… but based on what I’ve heard in the media and the legal analyses I’ve encountered, if I were on his jury, I doubt I would vote to convict on these charges.

    Reply

Leave a ReplyCancel reply

Primary Sidebar

Search

Chicago Metro Area Covid Status

Recent Posts

  • Ta’Kiya Young Shooting Analysis
  • Watching People Die – Part 3: Policy
  • Watching People Die – Part 2: Lessons
  • Watching People Die – Part 1: Incidents
  • America’s Rifle
  • Meet the New Cuteness
  • Jane Notz is Fibbing
  • Smarter Gun Control?

Where else to find me

  • Twitter
  • Post
  • Mastodon

Follow

  • Twitter
  • Mastodon

Bloggy Goodness

  • Agitator
  • DrugWar Rant
  • Duly Noted
  • Dynamist
  • Hit & Run
  • Honest Courtesan
  • Nobody's Business
  • Popehat
  • Ravings of a Feral Genius

Blawgs

  • a Public Defender
  • appellatesquawk
  • Blonde Justice
  • Chasing Truth. Catching Hell.
  • Crime & Federalism
  • Crime and Consequences Blog
  • Criminal Defense
  • CrimLaw
  • D.A. Confidential
  • Defending Dandelions
  • Defending People
  • DUI Blog
  • ECIL Crime
  • Gamso For the Defense
  • Graham Lawyer Blog
  • Hercules and the Umpire
  • Indefensible
  • Koehler Law Blog
  • Legal Satyricon
  • New York Personal Injury Law Blog
  • Norm Pattis
  • not for the monosyllabic
  • Not Guilty
  • Probable Cause
  • Seeking Justice
  • Simple Justice
  • Tempe Criminal Defense
  • The Clements Firm
  • The Trial Warrior Blog
  • The Volokh Conspiracy
  • Underdog Blog
  • Unwashed Advocate
  • West Virginia Criminal Law Blog

Bloggers

  • Booker Rising
  • Eric Zorn
  • ExCop-LawStudent
  • InstaPundit
  • Last One Speaks
  • Leslie's Omnibus
  • Marathon Pundit
  • Miss Manners
  • Preaching to the Choir
  • Roger Ebert's Journal
  • Speakeasy Blog
  • SWOP Chicago

Geek Stuff

  • Charlie's Diary
  • Google Blogoscoped
  • Schneier on Security
  • The Altruist
  • The Ancient Gaming Noob
  • The Daily WTF
  • xkcd

Resources

  • CIA World Factbook
  • Current Impact Risks
  • EFF: Bloggers
  • Institute for Justice
  • Jennifer Abel
  • StrategyPage
  • W3 EDGE, Optimization Products for WordPress
  • W3 EDGE, Optimization Products for WordPress
  • W3 EDGE, Optimization Products for WordPress
  • Wikipedia
  • WolframAlpha

Gone But Not Forgotten

  • Peter McWilliams

Copyright © 2023 Mark Draughn · Magazine Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress

Go to mobile version