OK, I know that I am going to get some negative responses to this post. However, I am a firm believer in the Edmund Burke’s quote that “The only thing necessary for evil to triumph in the world is that good men do nothing.” In addition, I want to stress that I am not anti-Republican, nor am I pro-Democrats. I am a proud Independent and I don’t think I have ever voted a straight ticket.

All this said I do feel compelled to share some opinions I have regarding Mr. Trump’s recent indictments, the response to them and some facts that I find compelling. Here goes:

1. Mr. Trump, as with all accused, is innocent until proven guilty.  I sincerely hope that he has a fair and speedy trials for all of his indictments so that the public will have a full picture before the 2024 election.

2. I would agree with those that find the timing of these indictments unfortunate. Ideally, all these investigations would have been completed sooner.  However, I do not believe that the timing is politically motivated, nor do I believe that the timing is intended to undercut Mr. Trump’s 2024 campaign. Consider the following:

A. These were very complicated cases that took time and required interviewing a multitude of individuals.

B. The federal indictments went through the grand jury process, which adds to the time. 

C. We must consider that one of the biggest delays to the investigations were the numerous objections and suits filed by Mr. Trump, and individuals called to give testimony, in an effort to prevent access to certain evidence and / or witnesses. All of this delayed the process considerably. 

D. We must remember that Jack Smith was appointed as special counsel to investigate these matters in November of 2022.  As such, Mr. Smith pursued the investigations, went through the grand jury process, responded to the variety of challenges, and filed indictments by the end of July 2023 (that is quite a lot in 9 months).

Again, the timing is unfortunate, but it doesn’t mean that the charges aren’t based on the evidence collected.  Finally, these indictments came down from a grand jury, not the prosecuting attorney or the justice department, and a grand jury indicts someone when they determine that probable cause exists and that there is sufficient evidence to justify a formal criminal charge (Note, a grand jury primarily hears the evidence that has been compiled to that point by the prosecution and they are not judging guilt or innocence.  The defense will be given equal time to challenge any charges during the actual trial in front of a trial jury).   

3. I read an interesting article this morning that pointed out that the most, if not all, of the objections we are hearing from Mr. Trump and his defenders are based on the process and deflection rather than the actual charges. Regarding process, we hear such statements as “politically motivated”, “witch hunt”, “banana republic”, “designed to hurt Mr. Trump’s 2024 campaign”, etc. Regarding deflection, we hear “Impeach the Criminal in Chief”, “Hunter Biden”, “Burisma”, “Hillary Clinton”, etc.  Why aren’t we hearing any statements in response to the substance of the indictments? “He didn’t withhold documents and here’s the evidence to back up that statement.” “He didn’t try to obstruct the January 6th joint Congressional vote to confirm Mr. Biden as President.” “He really didn’t want his supporters to storm the Capital and here’s what he did to stop it.” “He really did believe that election was fixed and here’s why.”  So far, the only things I have heard specific to the charges are that Mr. Trump relied on the recommendations of counsel and that Mr. Trump’s actions are protected under free speech (Note, I don’t believe that free speech is an acceptable defense for a criminal action.)

4. Consider the following statements made by Mitch McConnell, the Senate Republican Leader, shortly after Mr. Trump was acquitted of impeachment charges stemming from January 6th (Note, the following excerpts have been taken from an article written by Steve Benen of MSNBC.  Granted MSNBC is not the most unbiased source but what I’m sharing relates to direct quotes.). Mr. McConnell described the then President’s actions as a “disgraceful dereliction of duty”.  He went on to say, “There is no question – none – that President Trump is practically and morally responsible for provoking the events on the day (January 6^th). No question about it. The people who stormed this building believed they were acting on the wishes and instructions of their president. And their having that belief was a foreseeable consequence of the growing crescendo of false statements, conspiracy theories and reckless hyperbole which the defeated President kept shouting into the larges megaphone on planet Earth. Finally, he said, “President Trump is still liable for everything he did while he was in office, as any ordinary citizen. …He didn’t get away with anything yet. We have a criminal justice system in this country. We have civil litigation. And former Presidents are not immune from being accountable by either one.”

5. I think we need consider the knowledge of those currently defending Mr. Trump as it compares to where the evidence came from that the Grand Jury considered. 

A. The large, large majority of individuals who have come out to defend Mr. Trump and called this a “politically motivated witch hunt” and “the actions of a banana republic” have two things in common: 1. They weren’t “in the room where it happened”. They weren’t involved in the taking of government documents to Florida and they played little if any role in the efforts to overturn the 2020 election. So, they have no real evidence to back up their assertions. 2. Most, if not all, of his defenders have something to gain politically by defending Mr. Trump… and avoiding angering his base.

B. In contrast with Mr. Trump’s defenders, let’s look at those who have raised issues and / or given testimony that appears to support the indictments.  In this case we are looking at people like Mike Pence, William Barr, Pat Cipollone, Mark Meadows, Marc Short, Cassidy Hutchinson, and on and on.  All of these individuals have one thing in common… they were all part of the inner sphere of the executive branch and actively involved in the activities going on within the White House after the 2020 election.  They were “in the room where it happened” and gave testimony based on direct experience.

Thank you to anyone who has actually read this far in my little diatribe.  So, what am I trying to say?  I’m trying to say that I don’t believe the indictments of Mr. Trump are politically motivated.  Accusations, deflection, and challenging the process aren’t helpful.  Finally, as hard as it is in this polarized society, we must remember that a defendant is innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt by a jury.  Right now, no one knows all of the evidence that will be put forth by the prosecution or the defense, we need to let the process run its course.