Justice Served? A Former President On Trial

Try not to judge New York City too harshly; the city that never sleeps is going through a rough patch. But there are still good, decent, law abiding people who live there, and refuse to give in to the despoilers. Their only mistake is voting and electing into office political representatives, overwhelmingly Democrats, who are incompetent, self-serving, and power-hungry. Many of these individuals have little, if any, concern for the welfare and safety of their constituents. 

In a past article “The Government Against Donald Trump,” I gave brief summaries of the legal cases against the former president. One involved the New York Civil cases, in particular the falsifying of business records to hide hush money payments to a porn star during the 2016 presidential campaign. Although such payments are not illegal, Mr. Trump, to protect his family from embarrassment, had his lawyer personally make the money exchange, and Trump reimbursed his lawyer. There would have been no problem had Trump used campaign funds, which would have been open for public review.

This brings us now to what is considered an historic moment, the first-ever criminal trial of a former president. On Monday, April 15, at 9:30 AM, the hush money trial of former President Donald Trump began in the Manhattan Supreme Court, with Justice Juan Merchan presiding. The first order of business was to select a panel of potential jurors - 192 New Yorkers were assembled. At the outset, more than half were excused claiming they could not be impartial. 

The trial is not open to the general public, only a select few from the media will be allowed in court. There will be 12 jurors seated, and 6 alternates. The main witnesses for the prosecution include Michael Cohen, Trump’s former lawyer, porn star Stormy Daniels, and David Pecker, friend of the former president and former owner of the Enquirer newspaper. It is alleged Pecker played a role in the hush money scheme. 

Prior to the opening of the trial a questionnaire was distributed to potential jurors, which they were required to answer. They would also have to respond before the court to each question. Examples include whether they belong to any extremist group; what news sources and periodicals they get information from; whether they are politically active; and whether they have strong opinions or firmly held beliefs about the former president that would interfere with their rendering a fair and impartial verdict.

Most would agree this will be a closely watched and highly controversial trial that could last upwards of six to eight weeks. There is also, from a juror's perspective, an emotional and intimidating factor of having the former president’s fate in your hands, as he sits only feet away. Jurors' names will be kept anonymous, only the lawyers and consultants will have access to them.

The first two days of the selection process went rather slowly, but picked up by midweek. Seven had been assigned as jurors, but two were later excused for personal reasons. Stories emerged over the week that there have been jurors who may have misinformed the court of their feelings toward the former president. Some jurors have expressed their dislike of Mr. Trump, including two females, one say saying “He seems selfish,” and the other, “I don’t like his persona.” 

Some potential jurors expressed what I believe are the feelings of many - sitting on this jury for the former president was too much to bear. One in particular said it this way “I have to be honest; I feel so nervous and anxious right now. I’m sorry,” holding back tears with a tissue in her hand, “I thought I could do this, but I wouldn’t want someone who feels this way to judge me either.” Jurors also feared retribution and what could be threats to their lives. By Friday, 12 jurors and 6 alternates were seated.

Most legal experts believe Democratic District Attorney Alvin Braggs' case is weak, but they also feel there was no basis for the case to begin with, and that it was biased and politically motivated. Harvard University Law School professor emeritus, Alan Dershowitz, a diehard liberal, expressed his misgivings, "This is a bad jury for Donald Trump, I think it's too much of a New York Times, TikTok jury. This is maybe the best you can do with a New York jury pool, but it's not a good jury for Donald Trump. The best is he’s likely to do a hung jury."

After each session, former President Trump would emerge from the courtroom and engage the media, who waited with great anticipation for his arrival. Mr. Trump would usually begin each briefing with criticism and rebuke of the judge and district attorney, and he has stated on numerous occasions “The whole world is watching this hoax” or “witch hunt.” He has also had some choice words for the Biden administration, pointing the finger of blame at President Biden for instigating the prosecution.

The former president and his defense team have on numerous occasions asked that Judge Merchan recuse himself for reasons of bias. The Judge, a Democrat and donor to the party, and whose daughter is a Democratic operative, refused to step down. He issued a gag order against the former president, which Mr. Trump has ignored. 

On Monday, April 22 at 9:30 AM eastern time, the trial of former President Donald Trump began. I’ll conclude here with the words of two of the many headlines that heralded the start of the trial, “Jury Chosen: Here We Go,” and “Trial By Fire.”