Trump NY case could magnify 'mistrust' that made him 'president in the first place': conservative

Earlier this week, conservative lawyer George Conway wrote an op-ed for The Atlantic admitting that, at first, he believed that Donald Trump's New York hush money case "seemed the least serious of the cases against him." Bur following adult film star Stormy Daniels' cross-examination, Conway now thinks the falsified-business-records case is "at least some ways, the perfect case to put Trump in the dock for the first time, and" possibly even prison.

Another conservative, New York Times opinion columnist David French views the case differently.

In a Sunday, May 19 column, French argues, "Trump’s immorality and corruption should have disqualified him with Republican voters almost a decade ago, and now we have more sworn testimony that Trump is every bit as bad as we feared. At the same time, however, one does not defend liberal democracy through dubious criminal prosecutions."

READ MORE: New evidence reveals whether Trump will take the stand in his criminal trial: sources

He notes, "There are smart lawyers who disagree with me, who think the prosecution is standing on solid legal ground. I truly hope they’re right. But I’m worried enough to be deeply perturbed. A terrible man is in the cross hairs of American justice, but immorality alone doesn’t make him a criminal."

French also notes:

It is reprehensible that Republican politicians are marching down to Manhattan — sometimes identically dressed in Trump-inspired blue suits and red ties — to stand by their man. It’s dreadful that so many Christians still believe he’s the God-appointed savior of America.

But dreadful isn’t a synonym for criminal, and nothing about the terrible facts of the case has eased my legal concerns. From the beginning, it has been obvious that the facts of the case are damning, but the law is cloudy. The reason is simple: To secure a felony conviction, the prosecutor has to prove that Trump falsified business records with an 'intent to defraud that included an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof.'

However, the conservative columnist notes: "In court filings, the prosecution has argued that Trump was attempting to commit or conceal federal and state election law crimes, along with state tax crimes. The election law theory has real weaknesses, however."

"While I’ve long believed the hush-money scheme violated federal criminal law, I also recognize that the underlying legal theory has not been fully tested," French writes.

READ MORE: How 'Trump’s effort to delegitimize' NY trial 'leans heavily' on Fox News: columnist

French emphasizes:

To be clear, an untested legal theory is not the same thing as a weak or specious theory. If Trump is convicted, his conviction could well survive on appeal. The alternative, however, is dreadful. Imagine a scenario in which Trump is convicted at the trial, Biden condemns him as a felon, and the Biden campaign runs ads mocking him as a convict. If Biden wins a narrow victory but then an appeals court tosses out the conviction, this case could well undermine faith in our democracy and the rule of law.

"Our court system does not exist to guarantee political results, no matter how much one might want Trump to lose the election," French aargues. "And defeating Trump with an assist from a criminal prosecution that falls apart on appeal would exacerbate the mistrust that helped make Trump president in the first place and sustains his hold on the Republican Party."

READ MORE: George Conway: Trump’s New York trial is proving to be 'the perfect case'

French's full op-ed is available at this link (subscription required).

Related Articles: