Donald Trump can say almost anything with a complete disregard for truth outside the courtroom. And it has surprised even him (at least at one time) that his voters believe him, or willingly brush aside the lies.
I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose voters, okay. It's, like, incredible.
-- Donald Trump at a January 23, 2016 campaign rally
That statement appears to be even more true today. But within the courtroom, as many observers have noted, there are standards of evidence. Having Fox News, Steven Bannon, members of the GOP congressional caucus, and legions of MAGA voters in your corner doesn't cut it in a court of law.
Finally, a tawdry criminal case with a diverse cast of characters (including an adult movie actress, a tabloid publisher, a fixer employed by Donald Trump for more than a decade, as well as a string of other associates who have done, and in many cases continue to do Trump's bidding) and mountains of evidence reached the courtroom. And a jury of 12 convicted Trump.
Trump's legal strategy in a set of four criminal indictments has been to delay-delay-delay, while he has pursued a political strategy of besmirching everyone associated with the cases and doing his utmost to undermine the justice system and the rule of law. And, as with a shooting in plain sight on a public thoroughfare, the MAGA entourage and what counts as leadership within the GOP are with him.
Steven Levitsky commented in the Washington Post (the print edition's headline, "Despite outcome of trial, attacks deal a 'body blow' to judicial system," appears in the picture atop this post):
“What’s notable here,” said Levitsky, co-author of the book “Tyranny of the Minority: Why American Democracy Reached the Breaking Point,” “is that the entire Republican Party is marching in lockstep, along with right-wing media, claiming that the legal process has been weaponized, and therefore eroding public trust in a really vital institution.”
. . .
“It is unfortunate that far and away the least important case is the one that’s being tried before the election,” Levitsky, the Harvard professor, said as the trial was underway. “The problem is that not even the best institutions in the world can function well in the context of extreme polarization, particularly when one party has turned against democratic institutions. And so extreme polarization and extreme radicalization will undermine and destroy even the best of institutions. And that’s what we’re seeing in the United States.”
It is a perilous time for our democratic institutions, which, as we look toward November 5, include free and fair elections and the peaceful transition of power.