IN THE long and sordid history of Donald Trump, 77, there have been few surprises. But the verdict against the former US president on May 30 by a jury of 12 was a shocking thunderbolt.
Even Mr Trump was blindsided. Eyewitnesses present at the Manhattan Criminal Court said he desperately grasped the hand of a family member.
Whatever glimpses of tenderness evident that day were quickly replaced with the usual vitriol associated with the presumptive presidential nominee of the Republican party.
“This was a rigged trial,” Mr Trump said, returning to the script. “The real verdict is going to be on November 5, by the people. They know what happened here. Everybody knows what happened here.”
It was New Yorkers who helped build the myth of Donald Trump. It is fitting, then, that a group of New Yorkers have now thrown up the most powerful challenge to the edifice that the one-time business mogul constructed with the aid of a coalition of servile acolytes and political enablers.
The speed with which the decision was arrived at was the first notable aspect of the surprise. After six weeks of hearings, it took the jury just 12 hours over two days to come back with a verdict.
The second cause for astonishment was the actual verdict itself. The jury was not hung or undecided; its findings were unanimous and unequivocal. Mr Trump was guilty of all 34 counts on the charge sheet.
It was a stunning result, a stinging rebuke.
Howsoever the outcome is spun by Mr Trump, history will record that a jury of his peers came to this determination.
They did so after examining the evidence furnished by 22 witnesses, call logs, text messages, emails, recordings, cheques, invoices, and bank statements. They considered the law.
And their conclusion was beyond a reasonable doubt.
To quote the statement of facts attached to the indictment, “The defendant Donald J Trump repeatedly and fraudulently falsified New York records to conceal criminal conduct that hid damaging information from the voting public during the 2016 presidential election.”
Mr Trump, who denies all wrongdoing, alleges it is his political rival, Joe Biden, who is attempting to interfere in the outcome of an election.
Yet, it is the Republican leader who has been found to have so done. His hush money cover-up, like Richard Nixon’s scheming, was essentially an election crime.
Whatever sentence is handed down on July 11, lawyers will appeal. For Mr Trump, court rulings and judges are acceptable only when they align with his purposes or involve his appointees, such as in the Supreme Court decision that stripped women of rights.
“When you’re a star,” he boasted in the infamous Access Hollywood tape, “you can do anything.”
Well, almost.
The post A stinging rebuke appeared first on Trinidad and Tobago Newsday.
