The New York Grand Jury Case for Donald Trump: The Witch-Hunter and the Make America Great Again Movement in the Light of the Donald’s Indictment

Since former President Trump was indicted by a New York grand jury, questions have arisen as to how the case will unfold.

Trump is being investigated by the Manhattan District Attorney in connection with his alleged role in a scheme to pay a porn star to keep quiet about their relationship.

The decision is sure to send shock waves across the country, pushing the American political system, which has never seen a former leader in charge while running for president, into unknown waters.

“This is the most political persecution and election interference in history,” he wrote. “From the time I came down the golden escalator at Trump Tower, and even before I was sworn in as your President of the United States, the Radical Left Democrats — the enemy of the hard-working men and women of this Country — have been engaged in a Witch-Hunt to destroy the Make America Great Again movement.”

“I believe this Witch-Hunt will backfire massively on Joe Biden,” the former president said. The people of the United States know exactly what the Radical Left Democrats are doing. Everyone can see it. Our Party will defeat Joe Biden, then we will defeat Alvin Bragg, and finally we will take back our country from the Democrats so that we can make America great again.

The relationship between the presidency and the rule of law was completely destroyed by Mr. Trump, as he claimed that a president was above the law. It’s appropriate that judges and juries will now weigh in on his actions as president and as a candidate, with the possibility of criminal penalties on the line. Mr. Trump badly damaged America’s political and legal institutions and threatened them again with calls for widespread protests once he is indicted. But those institutions have been strong enough to hold him accountable for his actions.

Trump was caught off guard by the grand jury’s decision to indict him, according to a person who spoke directly with him While the former president was bracing for an indictment last week, he began to believe news reports that a potential indictment was weeks – or more – away.

That makes it a landmark. While Trump is only a few months into his third White House bid, he is already facing criminal charges, and will be a factor in the presidential race in two years.

Trump has long avoided legal consequences in his personal, professional and political lives. Through the years, he has settled a number of private civil lawsuits and related disputes at the Trump Organization. As president, he was twice impeached by the Democratic-led House, but avoided conviction by the Senate.

The office of the Manhattan district attorney has come under attack from Trump and his 2020 rivals, and the Speaker of the House has vowed to launch an investigation.

“Outrageous,” tweeted House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan of Ohio, one of the Republican committee chairmen who has demanded Bragg testify before Congress about the Trump investigation.

Sen. Ted Cruz, a Texas Republican, called the indictment “completely unprecedented” and said it is “a catastrophic escalation in the weaponization of the justice system.”

“We have a judge. We have jurors. There is appeals. I believe that justice will be done in the end. If he’s guilty it will show up. If that isn’t shown, I think that will be too.

The Investigation of Donald Trump’s alleged Sexual Affair with An Adult Film Actress: Michael Cohen vs. Christopher Bragg

ANDREA BERNSTEIN, BYLINE: Hey, Juana. So we don’t know exactly, but we do know the outlines. Late in the 2016 election, the Trump campaign received word that an adult film actor, Stormy Daniels, was considering going public, claiming she’d had an affair with Donald Trump, which he denies. The release of the “Access Hollywood” tape had Trump talking about sexual assault. Michael Cohen was worried that the campaign couldn’t take another blow and he paid Daniels to stay quiet. And after that, Trump, by then in the White House, personally reimbursed Cohen, while his company logged the payments – falsely – as a legal retainer. That’s the alleged crime.

The grand jury has been examining hush-money payments that Trump’s former personal attorney, Michael Cohen, made in 2016 to adult film actress Stormy Daniels in exchange for her not going public with allegations she had an affair with Trump.

Trump has denied having had an affair with Daniels, whose legal name is Stephanie Clifford, although he has admitted reimbursing Cohen for money paid to her.

Cohen met with the district attorney in Manhattan and praised Bragg for offering Trump the chance to testify.

The investigation began under then-District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. in 2018 and quickly grew to become a broad probe of Trump business practices. In 2019, Vance subpoenaed Trump for eight years of tax returns. Trump fought the request all the way to the Supreme Court, twice, but on both occasions the high court sided with the DA, clearing the way for him to obtain the records in early 2021.

The two prosecutors quit. A decision made in good faith may not be the right one. I believe that your decision not to prosecute Donald Trump now, and on the existing record, is misguided and completely contrary to the public interest.”

The investigation is a “witch hunt,” according to Trump and his attorneys. They have referred to Bragg, who is Black, as “racist.”

Legal experts say a criminal case could be difficult to prove in court. While Cohen was convicted under federal law, New York state statutes might be an awkward fit for the alleged crimes.

Trump’s actions run afoul of New York law, according to Mark Pomerantz, a veteran prosecutor who helped lead the DA office’s probe that started under Vance and who later resigned.

Pomerantz told NPR’s Fresh Air last month that the money wasn’t for legal services. The payments were documented that way. The creation of false business records is a crime in New York and the documentation of the reimbursement involved it.

Cohen said he was seeing different paintings while he was with him. “And he says to me something to the effect of, ‘Don’t worry, Michael. You will get reimbursement checks in January and February. They were FedEx’d from New York. And it takes a while for that to get through the White House system.’

Cohen said he got the first check for $70,000 soon after he promised, referring to the repayment that included two monthly installments.

The Case of Trump’s Expulsion from the House of Representatives to the High Courts (with an Appendix by Andrea Bernstein)

SUMMERS: For a while now the former president has been discussing this possibility. What is his reaction now that the case has been presented to a jury?

It is more heated than Trump’s usual reply. He writes that this is political persecution and election interference at the highest level in history. This witch hunt is going to backfire on Joe Biden. The American people understand what the Democrats are doing.

BERNSTEIN: It’s right. This isn’t just a former president. It’s currently a presidential candidate. The case of the company being charged and ultimately convicted of multiple felony took about 15 months to go to trial. So that would put us in the summer of 2024 – high campaign season. A trial could last weeks. Most of the time defendants appear at their own trials. The whole process could take longer, and Trump’s attorneys will be working vigorously to get the case dismissed. Two other prosecutors are investigating Trump and this may not be the only criminal case that he is accused of. We haven’t seen anything like that before. We know that it will be a true test for both the democratic and legal systems.

The summer seasons are summer. This is a story that is evolving. We’re looking forward to hearing what you have to say about this over the next few days. NPR’s Andrea Bernstein, thank you.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by an NPR contractor. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Availability and accuracy can vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.

The Indictment of Donald Trump and the Case of Hush-Mean-Monet: Wehle, A former U.S. Attorney

Kim Wehle, a former U.S. attorney and professor at the University of Baltimore, talks about the legal ramifications of an indictment of former President Trump.

Wehle. We’ve been fretting over it for many days now, and I am not one of them. And in a way, it’s good to have it actually happen. And hopefully we will see, in due course, the actual terms of the indictment. It’s hard to do a fair analysis when we don’t see that, I think.

FlaorIDO: He faces legal code but we don’t know the charges that he faces. What charges might the former president be facing?

Prosecutors were also weighing whether to charge Trump with falsifying business records in the first degree for falsifying a record with the intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal another crime, which in this case could be a violation of campaign finance laws. That is a Class E felony and carries a sentence of a minimum of one year and as much as four years. To prove the case, prosecutors would need to show Trump intended to commit a crime.

Wehle. Well, it’s a Class E felony under Manhattan – New York law, so I believe it’s up to four years in prison. I think it is, you know, way down the line. We have to get through many hurdles. You know, due process applies and attaches to Mr. Trump. And I think it’s really important to distinguish, you know, political stakes from legal stakes, and there are a lot of procedural, evidentiary and constitutional protections in place to make sure, you know, that that far-off question is fairly adjudicated.

FLORIDO: The Manhattan district attorney is bringing this case. His predecessor looked into these alleged hush-money payments also, but did not pursue charges, which raises a question, I think, about the strength of this case. What do you think?

Wehle. Well, I mean, he also – I think, at that point, reportedly, Cy Vance was looking into whether Donald Trump would be included in what ended up being an indictment and conviction of the Trump Organization for tax fraud and other crimes and, you know, the former CFO Allen Weisselberg’s guilty plea for that. Mr. Bragg took some heat for not pursuing that and you could argue he was more aggressive on one than the other. It’s important to remember that the voters of Manhattan chose him and the grand jury of his peers that indicted him, as well as the fact that he is an elected official. And then ultimately, if it goes to trial, it will be other voters of Manhattan that will make those determinations as to whether he’s guilty as charged or innocent.

FLORIDO: We have about 20 seconds left. So can you walk us in about 15 seconds and tell us when the charges will be formally announced?

WEHLE: Well, he – I mean, he will either be arrested or would show up for an arraignment, and then he would enter a plea. You know, I worked on the Whitewater investigation many years ago. There were a lot of special circumstances when Bill Clinton was before the grand jury.

WEHLE: …That were given to him. And my expectation is, if Donald Trump accepts them, he will be given kind of that respect of the office that I think he would deserve, like any former president.

All this plays into Trump’s air of grievance, really, that he’s used to propel his political fortunes – you know, that the left is out for him; that, in turn, also his supporters, they’re out to get; that the system is rigged; and that this indictment and investigation in New York, nothing more than a politically motivated attempt to derail his presidential campaign.

MONTANARO: You know, you’d think that an indictment would hurt someone running for office, but Trump seems to have insulated himself with his base, you know, convincing them that these are trumped up charges. Our poll, the NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll, this week showed that a majority – 57% – said the criminal investigations into him are fair. But – and remember, this is what’s important here when it comes to a presidential primary – 8 in 10 Republicans agree that Trump – agree with Trump and call the investigations a witch hunt. You know, a Quinnipiac poll out yesterday found that a majority of people say criminal charges should disqualify Trump from running for president. But three-quarters of Republicans don’t agree with that.

MONTANARO: Not really. Gerald Ford pardoned Nixon because he was unpopular with the president. You must have gone all the way back to 1872 to find a president who was arrested. You know, President Ulysses S. Grant was speeding – arrested for speeding with his horse-drawn carriage in D.C. But, you know, let’s not overlook the fact that Trump is now the first former American president to face criminal charges.

The Case for Trump’s Indictment: How Do Independents Don’t Want His Name to be President? What Daniels Has to Tell Us About The Corrupt Affair

So that’s a pretty big wild card, especially when, according to our poll, a significant number of people ranked preserving democracy as high on their list of most important issues facing the country. And that’s true of persuadable voters. Independents ranked preserving democracy second behind the economy. Trump’s brand, we know, has been toxic in competitive states in the last few elections, and he’s at risk with independents. Majorities don’t think he should be president, and they don’t have a good opinion of him.

MONTANARO: Very tough to say 80% of them say they have a favorable opinion of Trump. There are not a lot of Republicans that are making a sustained effort against him, and three-quarters of people want him to be president.

FlaorIDO: This is a story that is evolving. We’re looking forward to hearing more from you over the next few days, Domenico. Thanks, Domenico Montanaro.

What Daniels has said: For her part, Daniels, also known as Stephanie Clifford, met in March with prosecutors from the Manhattan district attorney’s office probing the payment, according to a tweet sent by her attorney, who said Daniels had “responded to questions and has agreed to make herself available as a witness, or for further inquiry if needed.”

She wrote a tell-all book in 2018 that described the alleged affair in graphic detail, with her then-attorney saying that the book was intended to prove her story about having sex with Trump is true.

After the news of the indictment, the former president continued his attacks on Bragg and other Democrats.

The Case of the Indictment of a New U.S. Senator for Using the Political Witch Hunt to Prevent Election Bias

His lawyer said the former president had been asked to surrender Friday in New York but that he was expected in court on Tuesday.

As for the former president’s initial court appearance, it’ll look, in some ways, like that of any other defendant, and in others, look very different.

First appearances are usually a public event. If an arrest of a person isn’t necessary, some arrangements are made with the person or their lawyers to give up their rights. When defendants first appear in court, they are usually booked and finger-printed. A plea is expected if the first appearance is an arraignment.

There are a lot of big questions here. A lot of congressional Republicans have rallied in support of Donald Trump, attacking Bragg on and off social media and accusing the district attorney of a political witch hunt.

And as part of the response to the indictment, Trump and his team will be rolling out surrogates beginning to hit Democrats, the investigation and Bragg across various forms of media as they work to shape the public narrative, according to sources close to Trump.

The indictment is important because it means that Trump will have his way with politics and may also be able to thrive. Regardless of the case’s outcome, Trump’s political career is built upon punching back against people he claims are unfairly attacking him and he has an instinct for using times of danger to his advantage.

Trump is under criminal investigation in Georgia and Washington, D.C., for his attempts to subvert the outcome in the 2020 race. He tried to attempt a coup each time he failed to face punishment for breaching the electoral system. He was spared conviction in his second impeachment for trying to overthrow the democratic system that he was sworn to protect.

The Implications of Gerald Ford’s Supreme Court Indictment of Nixon for Perjury in the U.S. Senate: The First Step Towards Accountability

There is a professor of history and public affairs atPrinceton University who is an analyst for CNN. He is the author and editor of 25 books, including the New York Times best-seller, “Myth America: Historians Take on the Biggest Lies and Legends About Our Past” (Basic Books). You can follow him on the social networking site. The views he gives are his own. There is more opinion on CNN.

The implications of his decision are beginning to sink in as the nation waits for details on the charges.

The first part of the indictment is about accountability. A turning point in American politics took place on September 8, 1974. After Nixon announced his resignation, President Gerald Ford pardoned him for any crimes he may have committed while in office.

Ford issued the controversial pardon in an effort to heal the nation and move past Watergate at a time when the US was reeling from stagflation and turmoil overseas as a result of Vietnam. Ford’s strategy didn’t work. Instead of healing the nation, the pardon helped magnify suspicions of corruption.

By avoiding the attempt to hold Nixon accountable, Ford circumvented the judicial process, and the nation never tested what could be done about presidents or former presidents who were accused of violating the law.

This was raised with President Bill Clinton. In 1997, the Supreme Court ruled that sitting presidents weren’t immune from civil law litigation that had taken place before they took office. The Senate rejected the perjury charges against him in 1998 despite the House impeaching him for it. After the case against him was decided, Clinton made a deal with a special prosecutor to not face prosecution for lying about the affair.

As a result, we just didn’t know if it would ever be possible to hold a president to account after he left the White House. The issue was not simply a legal question, but one that concerned the will of prosecutors and juries.

The Republicans have supported Trump in times of trouble, as they did during both impeachments. Former Vice President Mike Pence called the indictment an “outrage,” while Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, potentially Trump’s biggest rival in 2024, publicly stated that the prosecution’s action was “un-American.”

They have taken an important first step by reversing some of the damage that Ford inflicted on the body politic when he refused to allow the legal process to play out with a former president who had engaged in immense wrongdoing and abused his power. And if the nation fails to continue the long process of reestablishing the important standard of accountability, we will be perpetually trapped by the perils of an imperial presidency that holds commanders-in-chief to a different legal standard than all other Americans.