America's disingenuous media protested Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi's government wielding strong arm tactics to muzzle political opposition. Reports lambasted Modi's political party for filing corruption charges against his main rival ahead of this month's national elections.
South Korean politics has been marked for decades by fierce persecution of ex-presidents. The media cabal has derided the jailing or investigation of nearly every president exiting the nation's highest office. Opposition parties in turn routinely exploit popular anger over official malfeasance for political gain.
That's why the media's hyper partisan coverage of the first felony conviction of a major presidential candidate in America's 246-year history reeks of hypocrisy. It raises the ugly specter of American politics descending into the abyss frequented by thug dictators, such as Russia's Vladimir Putin.
Manhattan's Democrat attorney general aided and abetted by a former senior member of Biden's Department of Justice, conspired to indict and prosecute former President Donald Trump on bookkeeping charges.
The conviction comes amidst historically low favorable ratings for any incumbent president, The travesty of justice was a gift to a Democrat Party, thirsting for the opportunity to brand Biden's political opponent a "convicted felony" to bail out his faltering campaign.
Those partisans who complain the Democrat Party had nothing to do with the Trump conviction are suffering from irrational hatred for the former president. The facts are incontrovertible. A recitation of what transpired prior to the verdict of 12 New York jurors is illustrative:
- Democrat Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg ran on a promise to go after Donald Trump. Yet he allowed the case against Trump to lay fallow for 18 months after his election. Bragg waited until Trump announced for the presidency to manufacture his politicized case.
- Bragg owed his election to Democrat Party mega donor George Soros, the billionaire who showered Bragg's campaign with $1 million. The influential Soros donated the funds to Color of Change, a racial justice Political Action Committee (PAC), which funneled the money to boost Bragg's campaign.
- A member of the Manhattan DA office resigned in February 2022 after Bragg refused to charge Trump with financial crimes. The attorney Mark Pomerantz had championed the prosecution of Trump. Bragg ignored the pleas of Pomerantz, prompting the attorney to resign.
- Bragg's predecessor Cyrus Vance Jr. reviewed the Trump "hush money" payments and opted not to indict. The prosecutor for the Southern District of New York chose not to pursue the case in 2019. The Federal Election Commission reviewed the allegations in 2021 and did not take action.
- Bragg filed charges in 2023 elevating what are misdemeanor charges of bookkeeping errors into a felony charge of "falsification of business records." Bragg pumped up the charges to felonies by claiming Trump was concealing an unspecified second crime. Six years had passed since the original misdemeanor violations, exceeding the statute of limitations.
When Pomerant quit he intentionally leaked his resignation letter to The New York Times. The newspaper's account ignited a political firestorm among Democrats who were demanding charges be filed against Trump. Concerned about this political future, Bragg knew he had to act fast.
Pomerantz was one of three attorneys given a leave of absence from a heavyweight Manhattan law firm to assist Bragg. The firm is Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton and Garrison. New York Democrat Senator Chuck Schumer's brother Robert is a partner in the powerhouse firm.
After Bragg hastily unveiled his state case, a former Department of Justice senior official was brought onboard to help lead the inquiry, The New York Times wrote. The official, Matthew Colangelo, worked for Biden's U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland before he departed for Manhattan.
Colangelo was the number three official in the DOJ, serving as Acting Associate Attorney General. Garland plucked Colangelo from the New York Attorney General's Office, where he lead a wave of state litigation against Trump administration policies.
It strains the bounds of credulity to believe that Garland was not involved in the decision to send Colangelo to assist Bragg. Garland, testifying before Congress, scoffed at suggestions the administration was involved, labeling it a "conspiracy theory."
Imagine if a Trump appointed acting associate attorney general had departed to handle a state's prosecution of Hunter Biden. Would Democrats agree the Trump Administration was acting in good faith? An intellectually honest Democrat would confess the administration would be accused of abuse of power.
The insidious charade doesn't stop with Colangelo-Garland.
Presiding Judge Juan Merchan should have recused himself from the case. He made $35 in political contributions through Democrat PAC ActBlue in 2020, including $15 to Biden's campaign. Merchan asked the New York Advisory Committee on Judicial Ethics to decide if his contributions amounted to a conflict.
CBS News reported that the panel issued a caution to Merchan because political contributions of any amount by judges are prohibited under New York law. Despite the red flag, the ethics panel inexplicably ruled Merchan's ability to do his job was not impacted. State law and impartiality be damned.
A politically compromised judge will now determine the punishment for Trump on July 11. Some are predicting Merchan will not sentence the former president to jail. That's improbable because this sham prosecution is about putting Trump in an orange jumpsuit.
The politically motivated prosecution is covered with the fingerprints of Democrats at the state, local and federal level. Yet they keep repeating their mantra: "No one is above the law." It rings hollow when the DOJ allowed the statute of limitations to lapse on millions of dollars in tax evasion charges against Hunter Biden.
In the run up to the trial, octogenarian Biden and his fear-mongering Democrat Party have repeatedly warned a Trump presidency would be a "threat to Democracy." The bigger risk to democracy is that courts decide elections instead of voters. Democracy dies if that is allowed to stand.
