Below is a slightly expanded version of my column in the New York Post on the verdict in the Trump trial. The Manhattan case, in my view, was a raw political use of the criminal justice system. It is only the latest example of the use of the justice system for political purposes and harkens back to the Adams Administration at the start of our Republic. I discuss that period in my book, The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage (which is available this month).
Here is the column:
After years of trying — in the words of the judge — “to get the damned rascal in this court,” it was a conviction that many welcomed.
But those words were not from Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan, and the conviction was not that of former President Donald Trump.
Rather they were from US Supreme Court Justice Samuel Chase, at the end of the 18th century, when America embraced political prosecutions to target critics and opponents.
The man on trial then was James T. Callender, a muckraking writer critical of President John Adams.
For accusing politicians of corruption, Callender was charged with sedition, fined $200 and put in prison.
It was one of the many political prosecutions carried out by the Adams administration.
Undeniable reality
Political prosecutions are something most citizens associate with dictatorships.
But the Trump prosecution has forced many to confront the undeniable reality of the politicization of our legal system.
In many respects, President Biden and Democrats have re-created the Adams era.
Biden has led calls for censorship of political critics and his administration has coordinated the silencing and the blacklisting of those with opposing views.
Democratic politicians have pressured social-media companies to serve as surrogates for the government in banning, throttling and defunding individuals and groups.
Indeed, I have previously written that Biden is now the most anti-free-speech president since Adams.
The Adams era also reflected the same blind loyalty of many media outlets.
Federalist publications supported the crackdowns while echoing charges against political opponents as seditionists and insurrectionists.
Jeffersonian publications, like Callender’s, attacked Adams for his “unbounded thirst for ridiculous pomp, foolish adulation, and selfish avarice.”
The nation was divided down the middle as both sides accused each other of being traitors and insurrectionists. Sound familiar?
A chilling return
Yet, it is the politicization of the legal system that is the most chilling return to the Adams era.
Even liberal legal analysts and figures have admitted that the case against Trump was unprecedented and would not have been brought against anyone other than Trump.
CNN legal analyst Elie Honig recently wrote that there should be concern over a judge being appointed (not randomly selected) who is not just a Biden donor but someone who “has earmarked donations for ‘resisting the Republican Party and Donald Trump’s radical right-wing legacy.’”
Adding to these concerns is the movement of the third-highest official in the Biden Justice Department to the staff of Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg to build the case against Trump.
Before joining the case, Matthew Colangelo was also paid by the Democratic National Committee for “political consulting.”
So Trump was convicted in a trial with a Biden donor judge, who has a daughter who is a major Democratic operative, a lead prosecutor previously paid as a DNC political consultant and a jury selected in a district that voted roughly 90% against Trump.
The trial itself was a travesty.
Even after sitting in the courtroom watching the trial and the verdict, I still have no idea what Trump was convicted of in the case.
The charges were built on a dead misdemeanor barred with the passage of the statute of limitations.
It was zapped back into life by alleging that the falsification of business records occurred to unlawfully influence the 2016 presidential election.
Merchan told the jury members that they did not have to agree on what those unlawful means may have been.
Specifically, he allowed them to base their verdict on any one of three vaguely defined crimes of a federal election violation, falsification of business records or taxation violations.
Thus, the jury could have divided 4-4-4 on what actually occurred but the verdict was still treated as unanimous by Merchan to convict Trump.
Like much else in the case, that didn’t matter in deep-blue Manhattan.
Legal analysts and commentators openly celebrated on MSNBC and CNN — joining many in the streets.
This was a thrill-kill conviction, and the response of many in the media bordered on the indecent.
For many outside of Manhattan, the scene was repulsive and chilling.
You can hate Donald Trump but still be repelled by the use of the criminal justice system for political purposes.
There is, however, one silver lining. We went through political prosecutions under Adams and, to a lesser extent, Thomas Jefferson.
Yet, we survived. Our system corrected such abuses over time.
The Alien and Sedition Acts used to prosecute Callender expired.
Justice Samuel Chase was impeached for his partisanship (though not convicted).
With this case, you feel the weight of history in the conviction of a former president, but also a historical awakening.
Sometimes it takes a great abuse to shock the public into recognizing the need to act.
That was the case when the public finally saw Sen. Joe McCarthy in the first televised hearing of an Un-American Activities hearing. It was enough to stop the Red Scare and the abuses of political dissidents. Back then, the left was the target of such weaponization of the legal process. Today, it is the left pushing such abuses.
In the faces of ecstasy of demonstrators and commentators alike this week, we see the same joyful release from the bounds of legal process. The addictive quality of rage.
For them, it was a cathartic moment that was described by one commentator as a reason to celebrate and a “majestic” moment.
For the rest of us, it was more menacing than majestic.
It could prove to be the moment that galvanized many outside of Manhattan; the moment when citizens saw where our rage has taken us.
Sometimes we have to be forced to see what we have become to better understand who we are.
We are better than this.
Jonathan Turley is an attorney and professor at George Washington University Law School.
Well said professor.
However, as this trial has shown us, we may not be “better than this.”
This was a trial only worthy of a sham trial as we have seen in the former Soviet Union, 1930s Germany, the Culture Revolution, and in other third world countries.
The upside, the trial was in fact so shocking in how much it was a sham trial, many people whom dont even like Trump have donated to his campaign, bought some of his shirts, coffee mugs, and even declared the will vote for him this election.
This just may have been the moment the Democrats gave Trump the win.
I hope so.
The liberal left has no fear. They are convinced they can do anything and get away with. Hillary Clinton case in point. There needs to be some serious retribution. These people are not smart enough to learn from ordinary means. It’s unfortunate that it has come to this but we are now beyond the tipping point.
They believe it because it is largely true. This was the legacy of Obama. Control federal law enforcement, and to a large extent, state law enforcement, control the DA’s, control the trial courts. Those are the most important pieces on the chess board. Those groups determine what laws are enforced, when/if charges are brought, and even whether or not laws have been broken. You don’t even need convictions or jail sentences to achieve results, the process itself has been designed to ruin or bankrupt most people.
People enjoy making me miserable, so why should I care if they are ever made miserable by nuclear weapons?
The only person making you miserable is you.
The rest of us are indifferent if you are miserable or not.
Hmm “exercise of political manipulation”. Wouldn’t “criminals manipulating the judicial” be more apropos?
People enjoy hurting me, so why should I care if they are ever hurt by nuclear weapons?
If you rearrange those phrases, then you may understand why people do what they do
If you truly believe that, I would respectfully ask you to get off these platforms and go get some counseling. I don’t know you but wouldn’t wish you harm.
Dershowitz says “No, we don’t” to Biden’s statement that we all need to subordinate ourselves to the decision produced in the legal process. The legal system, Dershowitz informs us, is “deeply flawed.” And:
“This case was rigged.”
After seeing well over 600 comments in the previous column all wailing, and whining, and plenty of promises of retribution, and vengeance because Trump was held accountable for breaking the law in NY state is a testament to Trump’s thorough brainwashing of the gullible and weak minded.
This wasn’t a “raw political abuse” as Turley calls it. The irony is that real political abuse has been committed by republicans for four years in their quest to prosecute Hunter Biden. Republicans used the president’s son to seek anything that could lead to an impeachable offense to get Biden out of office.
Turley clearly participated in that quest without a second thought. Republicans sought to interfere with the Georgia case by seeking to remove Fani Willis by proposing legislation, digging into her personal history, filing complaints, and launching all manner of investigations to delay or throw a wrench in the process.
Turley of course is going to peddle the Fox News narrative and feed the rage of Trump supporters. The same rage he claims he’s vehemently against.
Trump may get a boost in funding, but most of it will be spent on lawyers and paying fines instead of using it to campaign.
Trump lost his case because he had incompetent lawyers. He always has incompetent lawyers. Good ones know Trump is a toxic client and he goes through lawyers like disposable solo cups.
That should be expected from a convicted felon and a criminal. As a consequence he’s lost some rights.
Dissenters are “weak minded.”
That is the constant drum beat of the Left’s ultimate smear:
You believe what you believe because your brain is defective. Ours is not. Kneel. And obey.
Turley of course is going to peddle the Fox News narrative and feed the rage of Trump supporters. The same rage he claims he’s vehemently against.
Professor Turley is defending the Constitution, and the rule of law.
You dont know that because both are areas you have no interest in, and possess no knowledge.
If you have a problem with the Prof’s take on the law, Challenge that.
Trump may get a boost in funding, but most of it will be spent on lawyers and paying fines instead of using it to campaign.
This the very essence of leftists idiocy. I’m not sure if its stupidity, or just the utter failure of logic.
George, take a moment and look up the “Fungible” Than find a 5th grader and have him explain to you why your comment is so stupid.
Iowan2,
Even being limited to campaigning in NYC, Trump rallies are far bigger, with a larger diverse groups attending than Biden can do.
Besides, all those people who donated to Trump’s campaign dont mind if he has to use it for lawyers and fines. It is a way to right a wrong.
50 Million in 24 hours from small donations, do the math Democrats. 80 M Biden votes? Fiction!
@George: Re: ‘gullible and weak minded”.. This President has, to the purpose of his agenda presided over, tolerated, or tacitly encouraged a sociopolitical revolution wherein tribalism, racist thought of all stripe, and woke ideology which has ruined lives and careers, has been given rein to hold sway. That which was tolerated in the way of social upheaval, violence, property damage, physical injury, and death in jurisdictions under Democrat control Is a sort of genocide against that party’s opposition? Neither this president nor his minions in federal state or local jurisdictions lifted a hand of intervention as their Black shirted, Antifa Sturmabteilung waded in, took over streets and brutalized citizens and the press exercising their constitutional rights. The lot of them should have been dragged before tribunals likes of that which was established for the January 6 affair, pilloried. But no! Only the current administration’s adversaries are worthy of rebuke. Those who expressed concerns regarding Donald Trump suspending the constitution support a current president who has already rendered it excrement In many ways. This shall no longer stand.
“because Trump was held accountable for breaking the law ”
@ George: We are still trying to figure out the law Trump broke, but you can’t tell us. Turley, who is far more intelligent and better trained in the law than you, says, “Even after sitting in the courtroom watching the trial and the verdict, I still have no idea what Trump was convicted of in the case.”
Logic and data escape you. That is why you are known as the Speech Moron.
S. Meyer,
Well said and spot on!
Trump was not “held accountable” for breaking any law recognizable as such before the existence of this case.
Trump’s “crime” simply did not exist as such prior to this prosecution.
The state law misdemeanor falsified business records charge was elevated to felony level by alleging the falsified business records were intended to defraud (whom?) and cover up a “crime” in the form of another state law misdemeanor violation: promoting a candidate by some “unlawful means” undefined in the statute. And the “unlawful means” in this case were asserted to be any one of three alternatives advanced by the prosecution and permitted by the judge—(1) (non-existent) federal election rule violations (2) federal or state tax law violations (3) misdemeanor falsified business records (again).
In which other prosecution have any of these laws ever been combined in this way?
Two state law misdemeanors, combined to make a felony, with the required underlying “unlawful means” for the second misdemeanor being either another time-barred alleged state law misdemeanor, an unadjudicated alleged state tax violation, an unadjudicated alleged federal tax violation, and/or a non-existent and in any event also non-adjudicated federal election rule violation, all with the jury not required to agree on any one of these. A truly amazing case. Not in a good way.
I am old enough to remember the 2016 election, where every Trump rally ended up with chants of “Lock Her Up” over some sloppy email security practices.
I am old enough to remember when Trump tried to extort Zelensky into announcing an investigation into Hunter Biden before the 2020 election.
I am old enough to remember 2023-2024 when whole Congressional committees are devoted to nothing but investigating Hunter Biden.
So no, the Dems are not the problem here with the weaponization thing.
I have worked for the DoD for over 30 years and that’s the first time I’ve heard of anyone call the setting up of a private server in a home (unsecured in any way) for the purpose of receiving official State Department classified email “sloppy email practices”. Wow!
And how many republican held committee’s investigated that, how much time and money alone did republicans spend on Benghazi ? How many indictments and convictions did they produce? Did the republicans investigate the Kushner’s server? Did they investigate the destruction of Presidential papers in the WH with Trump?
Did they investigate the destruction of Presidential papers in the WH with Trump?
There is nothing to investigate. The President can do as he pleases with his papers.
I would ask you to look up the laws about Presidential papers, but I know you won’t.
I would suggest you look up “separation of powers”. But I know you lack the ability to understand.
The Trump cult thinks it would have been more fair if the jury all wore red hats, and the judge flew the flag upside down.
In NY, Independent voters are now leaning toward Trump, 43% to 33%.
Are they Trump cultists too?
I know that a granting a change venue, for a trial centered on politics, was the proper path an honest judge would have taken
@Bubba: Re: “I am old enough to remember ..” I’m old enough to remember the joke about the lady in the supermarket sniffing a chicken and telling the butcher it stinks.. If we want to compare laundry lists the likes of which you have outlined above, commencing on the date Trump came down the escalator, your personal ‘chicken’ will fail the test. There are some circumstances in which a wise person is best to reserve comment so as not to appear the fool.
It had a fowl odor.
You are also old enough to remember that after the campaign rhetoric of “lock her up” was over, Trump did not lift a finger we to make it happen, hoping that letting it go would buy him some good will. I’m guessing he’s kicking himself in the ass over that decision now.
As to theZelensky call, when you have a former VP bragging about how he extorted the head of a foreign country publicly, that’s an outrage that needed investigation- especially coupled with the wide reporting that the son of said ex-Veep was making millions based on delivery of the money previously threatened.
I don’t really believe you’d be laughing if 33 state AG’s decided to follow the lead of Letitia James and go full tilt after your heroes – which may well happen. Laugh now, because you won’t find it funny later.
So your all in on Trump terminating the constitution? Jailing his political opponents? Having generals shot for treason? Political protesters shot in the leg?
Fishstick, it is Biden who is ignoring the Constitution. It is Biden who is jailing his political opponents.
When has anyone shot a general for treason?
When has anyone shot a political protester in the leg?
Trump said those things. look it up, but I know you won’t.
Fishstick, you know there is a difference between something someone says, and what they actually do?
This is why people like you are not very bright.
@Fishwings. Re:” Trump said those things…” Another laundry lister wearing a tinfoil hat. Of course you are aware of all the unsubstantiated or absolutely false utterances which have eminated from Joe Biden throughout his presidency. Videotapes and factchecking bear witness to these. As what he intends to offer up going forward, we’ve already had it snd uexpect more to come
@ Fishwings: Re: “ So you’re all in on Trump….” Hello!” “ Is there anybody in there“
Bubba, but Trump DIDN’T lock her up did he? See the difference or are to too dumb to figure it out?
Some sloppy email thing?! There’s your problem right there, she had a private server with highly classified documents, she destroyed electronic devices that were requested to be turned over in an investigation, she obstructed an investigation. That’s the tip of the iceberg, no one is above the law. Remember that Bubba!
Good piece by Dershowitz on the blatant Sixth Amendment violations:
“In fact, the prosecution didn’t tell the court what Trump’s other ‘crimes’ were until their closing arguments on Wednesday – by which point the defense had no opportunity to respond.
And even then, the supposed crimes outlined were vague.” (https://www.capitalismmagazine.com/2024/05/trump-guilty-verdict-in-new-york-demonstrates-partisan-weaponization-of-the-american-justice-system/)
The freeest environment for thought, expression and problem-solving is one where people can stay focussed on a problem long enough to reach a breakthrough in thinking that most agree is better than previous thinking. It starts to be degraded when people feel inhibited by fear — fear of being attacked, cancelled, belittled, etc. In the worst hell-hole countries, speaking out can result in loss of life (e.g., Navalny, Iranian dissidents). You won’t see much creative thinking emerge in such places, except for cleverness in better oppressing opponents and escaping such oppression.
While corrupt government poses the greatest levels of intimidation, activists seized by zealotry in freer countries can be the ones gumming up the works by intimidating opponents with militant discourse tactics. These can be overt (drowning out a speaker) or subtle (refusing to recognize a distinction between legal and illegal immigrants). These militant tactics are the bane of productive dialog, since they seek to commandeer the thought process and steer it in a manipulative way, rather than letting it develop freely.
I’m not hearing JT critique subtle militancy as counterproductive to free thought — it bothers me that he might even consider it deserving of free speech protections at the same level as non-threatening, non-manipulative lines of inquiry. Respect for, and enforcement of norms is pivotal to keeping the conversation positive and productive. I’m looking forward to JT’s book, and hope he can come at free speech from both threats — that of government oppression, and the spoilage of shared public spaces by activist zealots employing subtle militant tactics.
Because, either threat left to grow and fester will deny a democracy its capacity for wise public decisionmaking.
We have to figure this out, and time to do so is fleeting.
@pbinca,
What a great thought. That is a very good point.
“It was zapped back into life by alleging that the falsification of business records . . .”
“Specifically, [Merchan] allowed them to base their verdict on any one of three vaguely defined crimes of [. . .] falsification of business records . . .” (JT)
The jurors were instructed that the following is permissible “reasoning:”
You can use falsification of business records to revive and elevate into felonies the falsification of business records.
That is textbook circular reasoning. And almost makes me feel sympathy for the jurors.
Circular reasoning or a total circle jerk?
I am repulsed by many aspects of Trumps personality. I wish he was a better vessel of our hopes but he is not a threat to our freedom while Biden and the Democrats are. I am not inclined to make political donations due to my distrust of almost all politicians but on the day of Trumps “conviction” I immediately made a very large, for me, donation to his campaign and I will continue to do so. I have children and grandchildren and I fear for their future if Biden is reelected. It is strange to place one’s hopes in such an imperfect man as Donald Trump but the Democrats have left us no choice as they, and the media, have become the enemies of the people.
You should change the Biden photo at the top of the article to the one where he smirls slyly when asked about his involvement in the persecution of Trump. It perfectly encapsulates his blatant flauntng of anticonstitutional actions and disdain for integrity.
He will regret that smirk!
Your sentiments are laudable, Professor. But before we go back to courteous statesmanlike calm and fairplay, there must be a reckoning. And it must be forceful enough to reverberate through history. America-hating Leftist scum have forged this weapon, and now Trump must use it to crush them before it is disposed of. They have trampled the Constitution into the dust; time enough to destroy them before we pick it up and dust it off again. Before I was open to Trump getting some “payback”. Now I demand it.
So, as a democrat I am an America hating scum? I served on active duty for 25 years in the US Navy. What have you done for your country?
If you agree with the foreign policies and actions of your party since Bill Clinton and its domestic policies since 9/11, then yeah, you are an America hating scum. The fact you may have been bearing the brunt of those policies notwithstanding.
PS: same thing can be said for republicans, but they started with Bush I and, except for the never-Trumpers uni-party people like bolton, ended in 2016
Benedict Arnold served in the military, too.
Paid your salary for 25 years, pay your VA benefits and any retirement you may have, pay for your discounted shopping at the commissary as well as created thousands of jobs and private commerce as a business owner.
Wally, the Trump cult thinks tearing the country apart is their duty. They have outright distain for democracies and laws that stop them from ruling not governing. Thank you for your standing and service.
What is a woman?
What is white privilege?
What is BLM?
The Democrats have divided America along every social fissure, you’re getting ready to reap your harvest!
Simply stated, yes you are. Identify with America-hating scum, vote for America-hating scum, and presto! You’re America-hating scum. And I also served, not in the Navy, although it’s really none of your business, and I didn’t ask you about yours. So your service fails to impress me. Lee Harvey Oswald was a veteran. Jonathon Pollard, John Walker, and Bryce Pedicini are also Navy men.
“Sometimes it takes a great abuse to shock the public into recognizing the need to act.”
Honestly, Professor Turley, many of the “public” of which you speak have known this for a VERY long time.
That’s what J6 March participants and arrestees (go back and ready Julie Kelly’s accounts,) the ousting of Speaker McCarthy, the betrayal of Speaker Johnson, and the frustration of R House Majority have been all about.
We have been doing everything we can to encourage Republicans use the power they have, only to be told “we know better.
This current recognition is FINALLY happening among people in a position to do something about it- so we have the house issuing subpoenas, calling hearings, tweeting outrage and the dreaded strongly worded letters.🙄
Thanks for the historical perspective. I really regret that I will not be around to read about this era in the histories written ….
To all the absurdities in this case, add these two:
The Left’s sudden confidence in our criminal justice system.
The Left’s sudden disdain for convicted felons.
Good column. In fact, Biden and Adams have one quality in common. They had no friends. I have never heard anyone in our day saying that Joe has been my good friend for years. For Adams, excepting the on again and off again relation with Jefferson, it was the same. Indeed, Adams seems to have been repulsive in meetings. Reports about Biden seem to indicate he is not generally welcome even in the WH.
We aren’t better than this. And we are likely to be worse.
Jonthan I have seen various discussions how Trump can get the Supreme Court involved and noted your thoughts on the subject. If there was a time we needed the Supreme Court to get involved, its this time. I actually can see a 9 to O ruling or maybe 8 to 1 due to the numerous errors and the way Judge Kangroo Merchan handled this whole trial. It is already back firing on the DEMS
Will probably go down party lines, although it often seems the judges appointed by Trump have been compromised.
Never underestimate the propensity of Dems to eat their own.
Sit down and watch the show…
Stand up and watch the show
I only hope that we still are “better than this.”
Well done Professor
Maybe, but I can almost see the white in their eyes.