What’s on my mind this week is the same basic issue from last week’s edition, the Soviet-like show trial of Donald Trump going on in Manhattan.  To recap, DA Alvin Bragg has charged Trump with 34 felony counts for what he alleges are false business records, under a law that makes such violations unindictable misdemeanors, unless they are done to commit another crime.  But there are several minor problems.

The indictment was returned in 2023.  The statute of limitations on the misdemeanors expired in 2019, and the period of limitations on the felonies expired in 2022.  And, oh yes, just what the second crime that was supposed to be the purpose of the false entries might be remains unclear.  Bragg didn’t mention it in the indictment, and three weeks into the trial, he has, so far, failed to supply this detail.  This is an important, dare I say crucial, part of the case, and its absence proves this trial to be a clown show designed to affect the upcoming election, rather than a real trial, for without that evidence, there’s no way the judge can tell the jury what must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

Were this a real case, Bragg would have spelled out the second crime in the indictment, and on day one of the trial, the prosecutor would have told the jury in his opening statement exactly what he planned to prove.  That didn’t happen, which has left media commentators to speculate.

It’s so bad that even commentators from far-Left lap dog media outlets are criticizing this farce.  CNN’s Fareed Zakaria has said there would be no indictment or trial in New York City if the defendant’s name weren’t Donald Trump.  Zakaria laid out the facts, noting the increasing number of Americans now see through the charade, and know the former president won’t be able to get a fair trial.   Zakaria’s lucid interval even lasted long enough for him to admit that Trump’s immigration policies must be revisited and reauthorized to get the southern border under control.  Liberal Democrat Eli Honig, a former assistant U.S. Attorney, said that there wouldn’t be a conviction if the trial venue were held in a region of the country that liberals didn’t dominate.  Things have become so bad for Corrupt Demented Imbecile Joe Biden that even ardent liberals aren’t buying the bullshit anymore.

Professor Jonathan Turley, always an evenhanded legal analyst, was more blunt.  He said that the calculus of Alvin Bragg is now obvious.  He is counting on the jury convicting Trump regardless of the evidence.  “Bragg has vaguely referred to the labeling of payments to Stormy Daniels as ‘legal expenses’ as a fraud committed to steal the election.  However, the election was over when those denotations were made.  Moreover, many believe that such a characterization for payments related to a nondisclosure agreement is accurate.”  (Hillary Clinton’s campaign claimed in the same election that hiding the funding for the Steele dossier as legal expenses was perfectly accurate).

Professor Turley went on to note that Judge Juan Merchan has failed repeatedly to protect the rights of the accused in this case, but he held out hope.  “If he wants to show he is truly neutral, Merchan should grant the [defendant’s] motion for a directed verdict.”  That’s what any truly neutral jurist should do.”  Indeed, any fair and impartial judge would have tossed this crap out as barred by the statute of limitations.

I’m afraid Professor Turley is expecting too much.  He’s expecting justice to be done.  That’s a vain hope.  First, the judge isn’t fair and neutral.  He’s a partisan.   And secondly,  too many Americans have become all too willing to accept the concept of “Lawfare” as a legitimate political tactic; or if not legitimate, at least a tactic that too many people are willing to tolerate.  Lawfare is the concept that an acceptable method of attacking one’s political opponents is to use the courts to convict them, to bankrupt them, or to destroy their reputations.

Some friends of mine might say, “that’s just politics,” but it hasn’t been and must not be part of our political process.  Lawfare is the hallmark of totalitarian dictatorships and banana republics.  It’s unacceptable because it perverts justice and can lead to a breakdown of the rule of law.  Prosecuting the former leader when he’s out of office is nothing new.  It was a practice in ancient Rome.  The Roman Senate’s threat to prosecute Julius Caesar when he ended his campaign in Gaul was one reason he crossed the Rubicon River with his army, returned to Rome as a Dictator, and turned the Roman Republic into the Roman Empire.

I can understand why the purposely ill-educated general public puts up with this perversion of justice.  They are the victims of educational malpractice and don’t know any better. What’s incomprehensible to me is that highly educated commentators and public officials, many of whom are lawyers, and who understand all too well the perils of tolerating Lawfare, willingly accept the fact that criminal cases may be brought and jury verdicts may be based, not on the evidence presented, but on the political persuasion of the defendant, the prosecutor, the judge and the jurors.

Any American who values our system of justice, and who really cares about the “threats to our democracy” that Democrats are always crowing about, should be appalled by the travesties of justice ongoing in Manhattan, and elsewhere in this country.  If a defendant can’t get a fair trial in New York City or in Washington, D.C. simply because of political affiliation, that’s the threat to our democracy we should be worried about.  The sad fact is too many of us are willing to accept that truth, facts, and justice itself cease to matter when one Party controls the system.

It put me in mind of the British concept of Rotten Boroughs.  In 19th century Great Britain, there were largely unpopulated constituencies maintained by the crown or by aristocratic patrons to control seats in the House of Commons.  The King or the local Lord could control the small number of voters, and keep control of the legislature.  Hardly the same process at work today, but largely the same result.  Once deep Blue States have chased many of their conservative constituents to more friendly  jurisdictions, the tyranny of one Party rule is able to taint the concept of justice itself.  Manhattan and Washington, D.C. have become Rotten Boroughs where real justice has ceased to exist.  And officers of the court who understand how dangerous and anti-American this is report it as just another political fact of life.  Set your political persuasion aside.  If you demand justice for yourself, then you must demand it for your worst enemy.