The whole world, and especially America’s opponents in Moscow and Beijing, are watching closely for another “Trump psychodrama.” Everyone is trying to get an indication of the state of America’s health, and also the likelihood of the former Republican president’s re-election in 2024, which would have global ramifications. The investigation underway by a New York grand jury that could lead to his “arrest” (I insist on the quotation marks) is seen as fragile even by observers more hostile to Trump. Whatever happens, the Republican leader’s calls for revolt do not appear to be sparking major mobilizations, and fears of another January 6, 2021 seem exaggerated for now. And all this hustle and bustle, contrary to popular theory, shouldn’t increase Trump’s chances of re-election.
I’ll start with an explanation of the quotes above. What do we mean when we speak of arrest? It is highly unlikely that Trump will be handcuffed and locked in a cell. The arrest in question should be a bureaucratic and brief procedure: time to take his mugshot and fingerprints, as well as to formally tell him what crime he is charged with, if the special jury so decides. Then the accused would be free until the main hearings were pending. The formality can last a few minutes, although it’s full of “photo opportunities,” symbolic and spectacular images: No former president has ever been indicted, not even Richard Nixon, over the 1974 Watergate scandal. It’s Trump trying to turn his head It becomes a show that conjures up an arrest far more spectacular than it actually would be. It has already unleashed the imagination of fake news makers, who have circulated images of Trump in an orange prison uniform on social media or of police operations befitting the arrest of a mafia boss in the act.
The reason for the short and symbolic arrest is said to have been the indictment following the investigation into the Stormy Daniels case, the porn star paid $130,000 to buy her silence in the election campaign. The payment itself is not illegal. However, prosecutors argue that Trump hid the true nature of this payment in his company’s accounts, leaving us in an area closer to false accounting. It’s a criminal offense under New York law, not federal law. However, it is an infringement that is usually punishable by a fine, it is not a criminal offence. Prosecutors want to be able to link this violation to another, violating the Campaign Finance Act, which is a federal regulation. Even a newspaper that prides itself on practicing “resistance” journalism and campaigning vigorously in the anti-Trump camp, the New York Times, recognizes that “juicy details do not in themselves build an investigation.” The left-leaning daily claims that the prosecutor “must be able to pull off a difficult manoeuvre” “based on a legal theory never before used by a judge”.
To the strong doubts voiced by even the New York Times, something must be added about the figure of the prosecutor. The author of this survey is Alvin Bragg. His is an elected office and Bragg is a Democrat. Not just any Democrat: he belongs to the wing of the radical left that theorizes a judicial revolution to eradicate all social injustices. Bragg’s overall record is disastrous, even by many Democrats. If New York has suffered a sharp rise in crime, including murder, it is because it has released many inmates convicted of violent crimes. In particular, when perpetrators are from ethnic minorities, Bragg considers them by definition victims of an unjust society. The New York Police Department is complaining that it will not be able to restore order to the city if prosecutors release most of those arrested by the police. The Democratic Mayor, African-American Eric Adams, has repeatedly called for Bragg to be ousted, but state Gov. Kathy Hochul (also a Democrat) is the only one with the power and doesn’t dare. Indeed, Bragg’s crusade for empty prisons enjoys important support in the party’s left wing and in media outlets such as the New York Times. The suspicion is that Bragg decided to pursue his lawsuit against Trump in order to become unassailable and overshadow his management’s budget in the city.
The one against porn star Stormy Daniels is just one of many prosecutions that have been launched against Trump by various law enforcement agencies across the country. Some are already deflated due to apparent faction movements. The alleged maxi scandal that swept newspaper front pages when Trump was accused of taking home confidential White House documents became invisible when it was discovered that … everyone is doing it. Joe Biden has the garage of his home in Wilmington full of boxes of “classified”, ie top secret documents (memories of his vice presidency with Barack Obama).
The most serious investigations are likely to be those involving tax fraud, avoidance and evasion by Trump’s companies. They have dragged on for many years, some beginning when he was still President. The “così fan tutti” also applies here: As a pure real estate developer, Donald enjoyed tailor-made regulations for an industry that thrives on tax privileges. All major developers have also built fortunes thanks to scandalous tax instruments that allow them to minimize the tax burden. In upstate New York, these laws often bear the signature of left-wing politicians, since the Democratic Party is dominant in this part of the country. Trump was close to the Democratic Party for most of his life, funding the campaigns of all local politicians including Hillary Clinton and Democratic Senate Speaker Chuck Schumer. The tangle of complicity and complicity that allows homeowners to pay very little tax is so complicated it may explain why the Internal Revenue Service (the Revenue Agency) waited decades before doing serious investigations into the Trump accounts company initiated.
Therefore, the judicial shortcut has many limitations and contraindications. Perhaps that explains why it is Trump himself who insists on making trials spectacular: he must be convinced that he can win them and emerge as a martyr.
However, the martyrological path to re-election risks not working. Here I give the floor to one of the Republican Party’s most influential election strategists, Karl Rove. According to Rove, Trump’s call for his base to take to the streets to defend him from arrest is simply “stupid”. Rove explains his reasoning this way: If the Ultras of MAGA (Make America Great Again) obey the leader and cause violent protests, they weaken Trump’s chances of re-election, because they bring back to the fore his role in the attack on Congress January 6, 2021 Conversely, if the protests fail to garner mass support, as seems more likely, it will be a sign that popular support for Trump has waned. He could even combine the two negative effects: even small groups of thugs would be enough to give the impression of danger. In summary, for Rove, “the benefits of his impeachment to Trump are temporary” and destined to disappear soon. His strategy insists on mobilizing the most motivated and fanatical base, but already in 2020 this base was not enough to be re-elected. “The most likely outcome – Rove continues – is that his outbursts will convince more Republicans that he is not eligible.”
Meanwhile, Republican Ron DeSantis has already regretted overtly aligning himself with Trump’s stance on Ukraine. The governor of Florida had described the war in Ukraine a few days ago as “a territorial dispute” in which “no vital American interests are at stake”. Overwhelmed by criticism from the classic Republican establishment, which is certainly not pro-Russian, DeSantis rolled back his steps, saying his words were “misunderstood” and calling Vladimir Putin “a war criminal.” Xi Jinping and Putin must think at this stage that a Republican victory would weaken the Western Front by pushing America back to isolationist positions; but if they bet on the stability of Trumpism, they are making a risky calculation.