The Verdict of the Trump Hush Money Trial Is the Ultimate Example of ‘Lawfare’

Last week in a Manhattan courtroom, the Democrats finally secured a conviction against Donald Trump, reminiscent of Shakespeare’s “The Merchant of Venice” where the pursuit of revenge could lead to their own downfall.

The guilty verdict is likely to be overturned by the New York appellate or federal courts eventually. However, this may only happen after the Democrats achieve their goal of election interference. State prosecutors have never before charged a defendant with federal election reporting violations, and a jury has never considered non-disclosure agreements as reportable federal campaign expenditures in a criminal trial.

In a legal maneuver, Trump was denied his constitutional rights to notice of charges and a unanimous jury verdict. Instead, the jury was allowed to choose non-unanimously from various additional charges to manufacture a felony out of a minor bookkeeping violation.

When independent counsel Ken Starr pursued President Clinton for covering up an affair, Democrats objected to the selective use of the law against a political opponent. However, their stance has changed dramatically in recent years.

The industry of lawfare has thrived as Democrats reacted to Trump’s election by launching investigations and supporting unfounded claims of Russian collusion. Media outlets sensationalized these allegations, putting aside journalistic integrity for ratings.

Special counsel Robert Mueller cleared Trump of Russian collusion but raised potential obstruction of justice charges. Democrats quickly moved on without apologizing, illustrating their cynicism.

This is not a defense of Trump’s actions, but a critique of the left’s embrace of legal authoritarianism in pursuit of lawfare.

The delay in prosecuting the Jan. 6th riots raises suspicions of political influence, highlighting the use of law enforcement for partisan agendas. Democrats may face repercussions if similar legal tactics are used against them in the future.

Hunter Biden’s prosecution for allegedly lying on federal gun applications could signal a turning point, where lawfare may boomerang back on its initiators. The Manhattan case against Trump could pose a serious threat to democracy.

Julian Epstein, former Democratic Chief Counsel to the House Judiciary Committee.