By Stephen Smoot
Consider the case of a young impoverished black man arrested and prosecuted in New York City. Police failed to make a solid case against the young man, but prosecutors filed three charges against him for armed robbery, assault and battery, and breaking and entering.
Prosecution witnesses included a known prostitute, a disgraced lawyer, and other shady characters whose testimony raised more doubt than not.
The young impoverished black man’s lawyer protests vehemently when the judge says that the defendant is such a threat to his neighborhood that the jury need not come to a unanimous conclusion on any one charge. Four can settle on armed robbery, four on assault and battery, and four on the breaking and entering. The judge will conclude that any combination thereof from the jury represents a guilty verdict and the young impoverished black man will face the full weight of the justice system against him.
Outraged yet?
Now consider that the case described prior is a hypothetical. In the real life situation, the defendant is Donald J. Trump. His case is only different than the hypothetical in that the charges he has been tried on have basically been invented from thin air.
For example, the “hush money” that he is accused of paying was reported to the Internal Revenue Service on a 1099 form. In what universe does one make a hush payment, then report it to the federal government?
The Left cheers this example of what Joseph Stalin used to call a “show trial,” farcical judicial proceedings against people deemed politically undesirable. This farce of a trial, however, has very real consequences that extend beyond the former and likely future president.
Return to the case of the young impoverished black man. The American judicial system rests on the concept of “stare decisis,” or let the prior decision stand unless circumstances warrant something different.
What a prosecutor and judge used against Trump and his lawyers paid by millions of dollars will also come to pass against the young impoverished black man represented by a bored and/or incompetent public defender whose only goal lies in getting a plea and avoiding the work of a trial.
Regardless of whether one thinks Trump is the ultimate secular saint or worst political demon, this precedent serves as the biggest threat to the rights of the accused in American history. The Left’s Captain Ahab-like pursuit of Trump, unless the United States Supreme Court or other higher court gives the judge the rhetorical spanking he deserves in a reversal should Trump be “convicted,” will have a horrific ripple effect.
It will drown defendants who lack the means to fight a judicial system stacked high against them.
The headline came from a quote spoken by Lavrenti Beria. Beria served as Joseph Stalin’s last head of Soviet secret police. Stalin used prosecutors and trials to eliminate rivals and potential rivals from the political stage. Observers called them “show trials” because the crimes never happened, the charges were invented, the goings on of the trial held up as popular entertainment, and the verdicts never in doubt.
New York State’s show trial and similar farces across the nation directed at Trump, if not dramatically reversed by a higher court, will cost impoverished defendants dearly. They will pay the price for the Left’s lynch mob mentality long after whatever happens to Trump.
But they don’t care. Their hatred is a pure burning fire. Either douse it completely with cold water, or watch it burn down the rights and liberties that citizens of a Republic hold dear.