At the beginning of the 20th Century, the American author O. Henry coined the term Banana Republic.  The term describes a politically and economically unstable country with stratified social classes, and a ruling class composed of the business and political elites.  A nation that’s a banana republic is run by the wealthy business elites and political leaders, who gain their wealth by exploiting the public.  Tell me that doesn’t describe the United States of America in 2023.  Do we not have stratified social classes?  The wealthy exist in a world of their own, exempt from the daily inconveniences that trouble the rest of us, like inflation, higher taxes, green energy restrictions and rampant street crime.  They live behind their walls, protected by personal security, fly on their private jets, and avoid contact with the savages in the streets by traveling by limousine rather than by subway.  Do we not have a shrinking middle class, courtesy of liberal Democrat policies?  And do we not have an ever-growing underclass, fueled by the erasure of our borders, and the illegal entry of millions of “migrants” who immediately qualify for government benefits?  Not convinced yet?  Another mark of a banana republic is  a corrupt media that serves the elites, and not the truth.  The words of Malcolm X are instructive on this point, “The media’s the most powerful entity on earth.  They have the power to make the innocent guilty and to make the guilty innocent, and that’s power, because they control the minds of the masses.”  Look around.  Tell we’re not there.  The final component of a banana republic is the corruption of the justice system, which is weaponized for use against political opponents.  On this score, I refer you to this week’s indictment of former president Trump by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg.  Alvin Bragg is aptly named, because he gained election to his position through braggadoccio.  During the campaign, Alvin bragged that he had sued the Trump Organization more than 100 times and that, if elected, he would get Donald Trump.  He said this in 2021, when he wasn’t part of the Mahattan DA’s Office, and thus unconnected to the ongoing Trump investigation.  Now, I was a prosecutor for 25 years, not a fake prosecutor like Chris Christie, but one who actually appeared in court and prosecuted defendants.  The job of an honest prosecutor isn’t to name a target for prosecution, and then search for facts that might constitute some crime.  An honest prosecutor is presented with facts concerning a person or persons, and then decides if those facts contitute a crime that should be prosecuted.  Bragg used the KGB method, “Show me the man and I’ll show you the crime.”  Those of you who have followed these pages know that I’m not a MAGA fanatic.  I’m not looking forward to a Trump 2024 campaign.  I voted for him twice, and I’ll do it again if I have to, but I’d prefer a Republican with less baggage.  That being said, if you’re going to indict a former president, you ought to charge a real crime.  By now, you’ve heard enough about “34 felonies” and “136 years in prison.”  Take it from me.  Working for the NJ Division of Criminal Justice for so long, I saw plenty of shitty indictments, but the Trump indictment is pure horse shit, right off the stable floor.  Where do I begin?  34 felonies.  First of all, if the crime isn’t a felony, you can’t put it in an indictment, so sure their felonies.  34, not so much.  The whole indictment deals with payments to two bimbos, and a Trump Tower doorman, all of whom were trying to blackmail Trump during the presidential campaign.  Each of them threatened to reveal embarrassing information about Trump, and each signed non-discloure agreements, which the lying media (see above) calls “hush-money,” and were paid to keep silent.  The indictment doesn’t charge those payments as crimes, because they’re not crimes.  Non-disclosure agreements are perfectly legal.  Bragg’s indictment charges making false entries in business records about reimbursment payments made to convicted liar, and former Trump attorney Michael Cohen, which listed the payments as legal expenses.  Bragg claims they were really campaign expenses, should have been logged that way, and paid for with campaign funds.  The FEC, which is in charge of such things, disagrees, saying that payments which would have been made regardless of an election, are not campaign expenses.  There are myriad reasons why a billionaire businessman and TV star would make those payments.  The upshot?  If Trump used campaign money, the Feds would charge him with a violation.  Because he used personal funds, Bragg charged him.  Doesn’t seem right somehow, does it?  So how do you get to 34?  It’s what’s known in the trade as a multiplicious indictment.  There are 11 monthly payments in 2017.  Each was split into 3 false records crimes for “making a ledger entry,” “making an invoice,” and “making a voucher.”  11 times 3 is 33, then add 1 for the doorman, and voila, 34 felonies.  Horse shit.  Then, these acts, if indeed criminal, are only felonies if they were done to aid or conceal another crime.  What crime?  We still don’t know, because the indictment doesn’t say.  Bragg says it’s not necessary.  The Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution say otherwise.  A defendant must be given notice of the charge and must be able to understand that against which he must defend.  This indictment falls short.  You know, in New Jersey we sometimes name laws after people, usually victims, like Megan’s Law and Philomena’s Law.  Bragg’s indictment falls under what should be called Kafka’s Law.  In Franz Kafka’s book, The Trial, defendant Joseph K. is arrested and put on trial, but no one will tell him on what charge.  Here, Donald T. is called upon to defend himself from the charge that he was covering up another crime (unspecified).  We’re told it might be a campaign law violation.  That was detailed above.  Horse shit.  We’re told the crime might be conspiracy.  Conspiracy to do what?  Hold onto your hat.  Conspiracy to defraud the public, by not letting the bimbos reveal embarrassing information before the election, thus permitting Trump to win in 2016.  No, I’m not kidding.  If lying to voters to try to get elected was a crime, Hillary Clinton would be walking the Green Mile now.  And if Bragg is suggesting that the 2016 election was tainted, doesn’t that make him an election denier?  Not shitty enough yet?  How about all this shit is beyond the 5 year statute of limitations, which bars prosecution?  Here’s what I think will be Bragg’s answer to that.  The NY statute of limitations law has a part (b) that allows the deadline to be extended if the defendant was continuously out of the State.  Bragg will say Trump was in D.C., being president.  Don’t laugh, it might work in Manhattan.  All this reminds me of the Woody Allen movie Bananas, set in the banana republic of San Marcos.  “I object, Your Honor!  This trial is a travesty!  It’s a travesty of a mockery of a sham of a mockery of a travesty of two mockeries of a sham!  I move for a mistrial!”