34 Counts for Truth
For decades, whenever a criminal defendant has claimed innocence, a great number of people—including the court’s appellate system of prosecutors and judges—deny anything was wrong. “Well, the legal process played out. A jury found the defendant guilty. That means he’s guilty.”
Darryl Hunt spent nearly 19 years in prison wrongfully for a 1984 murder in Winston-Salem. Over the course of years of appeals, he continually saw police, prosecutors and judges change their theories of the crime to justify keeping him locked up despite DNA that proved he was not man who had attacked the victim.
Donald Trump famously continued to disparage the Central Park 5 defendants long after they were exonerated based on another man’s confession and corroborating DNA evidence, and the actual perpetrator’s statement that he acted alone. (Coincidentally, it was a similar “spontaneous” confession by the actual perpetrator that resulted in Hunt being freed. Note to doubters: People don’t spontaneously confess to crimes they commit unless they harbor extreme guilt.)
How ironic, then, that when Trump last week was found guilty of 34 felony counts of trying to influence the 2016 presidential election through hush money payments to a porn star, he and his supporters railed against the legal system as being corrupt.
The message is clear: The legal system doesn’t apply to Donald Trump.
Well, a jury of 12 of Trump’s peers felt otherwise. Thankfully.
There’s been a meme going around recently. “A man with a pattern of cheating his customers, vendors and business partners is going to cheat you. A man who’s casually betrayed his wives, again and again, will casually betray you. A man who lies all the time is lying to you. A man who has spent his entire life screwing people over is going to do the exact same thing to you.”
The truth is that these are indisputable facts; there is a mountain of evidence to each and every one of those patterns. We even have videos that demonstrate the man’s essential nature.
My wife and I traveled recently to her hometown in western New York State, a community known for its conservatism but which she remembers as quiet and quaint. There we saw vulgar signs on lawns and in the windows of some houses (including the home where her grandmother once lived) disparaging the current president, Joe Biden. At what point in our history has it ever been OK to publicly use such coarse language, much less encourage and promote it?
If you’re struggling with that one, let me pinpoint it for you. It was 2015, the year Trump decided to run for office. I feel sorry for parents of children introduced to this type of vitriol so young who have to explain things for which there is no legitimate explanation.
Oppose the current president all you want, but tearing down essential parts of what has made our country work—the rule of law, a culture of civil discourse, a willingness to seek compromise, the integrity of our electoral system—is despicable. That so many have fallen for the wall of lies offered by Trump and his minions is incredibly sad. And if you don’t believe it threatens our country, please see Germany circa 1930s.
I’ve never been registered with a political party, but willfully acknowledge I tend to be fiscally conservative and socially liberal. I have voted for political candidates of both major parties—and independent candidates—all my life.
If there’s one thing I know now, it’s this: I will not vote for Republicans for any office the rest of my life unless they renounce the tactics and actions of their party under the leadership of Trump and Trump enablers such as Mitch McConnell and Mike Johnson.
If centrist Republicans, who represented the party’s vision for decades (fiscal conservatism, supporting American-style democracy over authoritarianism around the globe), come forward and decide to separate from the extremists who now rule, I’ll consider changing my mind. Until then, well, I can only fight fascist wannabes by speaking up like this.