There was something symbolic that occurred yesterday when a jury in a New York City courtroom brought down a unanimous verdict of guilty against former President Donald Trump. As has been repeatedly observed, the rule of law prevailed and American democracy worked, almost totally without incident. While there is much to say about the importance and impact of the conviction of the former President on 34 felony charges, what actually should be equally important to the American people was the conduct of the members of the jury.
The decision was unanimous. It was rendered after a jury of Donald Trump’s peers had deliberated for approximately ten hours over two days. The verdict was clear and irrefutable; except if, like the former President, a person rejected the legitimacy of the entire judicial system. While people might suggest they would have rendered a different verdict, there is no question that the system worked, the jury understood its task, and it acted accordingly.
This process was somewhat analogous to the manner in which the U.S. Supreme Court reached its decision on July 24, 1974, in the case of U.S. vs. Nixon. In this famous Watergate tapes case, a unanimous opinion written by Chief Justice Warren Burger (with Justice William Rehnquist recusing himself) the Court ruled that then President Richard Nixon had to turn over the White House recordings to the U.S. District Court. The Members of the Court, and specifically the Chief Justice, understood the importance that this opinion be seen by all as a definitive Supreme Court ruling. The Justices needed to craft an opinion which left no doubt in the minds of Americans that whatever information was on these tapes could be admissible in court, would be usable by the special prosecutor, and could be employed by the U.S. Congress in its pursuit of a possible impeachment and trial of President Nixon.
It appears clear that in a similar manner, the twelve members of the jury sitting in the jury box in lower Manhattan for five weeks saw the need to present a similar, definitive opinion in the Trump case. From the small amount of information that was heard concerning the jury, their news sources appeared to have been very diverse. When the verdict was announced it seemed clear that this had not affected their ability to consider the facts in the case without the bias that different news outlets and platforms could have suggested they might display. The conclusion that they collectively reached indicated, as well, that they understood the responsibility thrust upon them and the extent to which they were motivated to present a decisive verdict.
----------
The Inexplicable
Instant analysis of the political and electoral consequences of the New York Court’s decision on Donald Trump’s efforts to regain the White House next November are totally speculative and premature. Much will depend on how former President Trump and his campaign as well as President Biden and his campaign spin this verdict to their respective advantages.
The verdict undoubtedly will affect Republicans as well as potential Republican and Independent voters. It will also impact Republican candidates running down ticket from Trump. Interesting polling will begin to appear as the impact of the decision is used by the respective campaigns in the weeks ahead. In addition, whatever stirrings that this verdict will have, the entire debate will be re-engaged following the actual sentencing of Donald Trump on July 11, four days before the Republican National Convention.
Similarly, reports had been indicating that many of Trump’s very large donors already were doubling down in their support for his re-election. They sought to demonstrate strong loyalty to the former President ahead of the verdict. It has been suggested that this was based largely on the fact that many of his monied followers were rejecting the Biden economic program and were seeking to insure that the Trump tax cuts be extended in 2025.
There is now an even more cynical game which some of his supporters are playing. Having lost this case, Trump has lost some of his perceived invincibility. While he will never admit it, Trump, more than ever, will need support from his backers. From their perspective they recognize that he will require their support and as well as their financing. The large donors may now believe that their active public backing of the former President in his “time of need” will effectively insure—more than ever--that they will receive a guaranteed favorable hearing in the next Trump White House.
Comentários