The indictments against former president Trump trouble me. I’m not a lawyer, but as I see it, an indictment against a former president is unprecedented, but aside from that, they are legal business as usual: A prosecutor suspects a crime has been committed. Random voters in a jurisdiction are called together in a grand jury panel. The prosecutor presents evidence against the accused, then an indictment is issued when a majority of the grand jury votes that the expense and trouble of a trial is justified.
An indictment is not a statement of guilt or innocence, only that the evidence is worth pursuing. A trial follows; evidence both for and against the accused is presented. Then a judge or a trial jury decides guilt or innocence. State and federal grand juries differ in detail but are for the most part the same.
To this observer, the former president is cutting off the presidential limb he sits on. This is Looney Tunes.
Indictments are expensive in time and resources, a drawn out and elaborate ritual designed to make it difficult to obtain a conviction against an accused person. The deck is intentionally stacked against the prosecution. Therefore, prosecutors seldom pursue an indictment unless they have a strong case. Over ninety percent of indictments result in a conviction, which we taxpayers payers who foot the bill for grand juries and trials should applaud.
Despite all speculation over the strengths and weaknesses of the cases and a “past performance does not guarantee future results” warning label, odds are high that at least one of the former president’s three indictments will result in a conviction. With more indictments expected the likelihood that at least one strand of spaghetti will stick to the wall approaches certainty.
Not a typical post-presidency, but if Trump had not been president and didn’t have a major political party backing him, only his friends, family, and associates would care. In this world, crimes are committed and criminals are punished.
Nothing special to see here folks.
This week the New York Times reported that two conservative law professors, Federalist Society types, have suggested that Trump is ineligible for federal office, unless two-thirds of both the Senate and the House of Representatives vote to grant him amnesty for his conduct on January 6, 2021. The former president may have more than indictments to fend off in court before returning to the office he covets.
Election winners love democracy, losers not so much— until the next election. The marvel of democracies is that the losers always have a next election to win. That next election depends on the continuity of the democratic system that validates elections and governs terms of office. In the U.S., the system is derived from the U.S. constitution that is the basic contract between the U.S. government and its citizens. Federal officials swear to uphold the constitution, which, in turn, empowers them to carry out their functions.
The former president has repeatedly questioned the authority of the constitution to govern the presidency and the validity of the election process. To this observer, the former president is cutting off the presidential limb he sits on. This is Looney Tunes.
The U.S. constitution has survived two centuries to become the governing document of the wealthy and powerful nation. Is it possible that it is coming to an end??
I hope not.
Hold fast. Be patient. Keep trying.