This author had written before and commented specifically about the U.S. judiciary system regarding the Foreign Corruption Protection Act (FCPA), for example, the notorious Alston case and many other cases as well as the International Emergency Economic Power Act (IEEPA); for example, the recent notorious case - the Huawei's financial executive Ms. Meng Wan Zhou case. Ms. Meng was being pursued by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Division of Homeland Security department and the U.S. Justice Department. The U.S. Congress often enacts laws proposed by the Administration, the enacted laws then allow the Administration to prosecute the 'violators' of the laws through the justice department (JOD). These actions were termed as U.S. long-arm law enforcement in the international arena. Long-arm of course implies that the U.S. jurisdiction is far-reaching to foreign countries regardless of their legal systems. In Alston's case, the company was eventually closed and sold to a US company. In Huawei's case, Ms. Meng was released after three years of house arrest in Canada. Huawei company's 5G products were banned in the U.S. and elsewhere because of the U.S. accusation of a potential national security threat. These past cases are evidence that the U.S. judiciary system is highly political and subject to governmental influence.
In this writing, the author will discuss the subject matter under US domestic jurisdiction but anticipating its important international impact, that is the legal cases against the U.S. presidential candidate, Donald Trump. Trump, the former U.S. President, is nearly the De-facto Republican Party's nominee for the 2024 presidential election. However, Trump is facing multiple legal cases against him while he is working hard on his campaign to win the presidency in 2024. We are not here to judge Donald Trump on his business conduct, personal behavior, or patriotism (that is for the society and American people to determine.) What we will discuss is the operation of the American judiciary system, in handling Donald Trump's cases - whether the system should avoid being influenced by national politics or the government. In a fair democratic system, no one is above the law, but the law must be fair and equal for everyone regardless of the person's fame, fortune, or political and religious belief. In facing legal prosecution, Donald Trump seems to get more than a fair share of attention from the DOJ compared to an ordinary citizen. The intense 'attention' came from the DOJ despite its backlog of cases and the attention also came from the media amid presidential campaign activities. These attentions are not giving Trump preferential treatment but extra harassment. All in all, it appears that there is an 'invisible' influence on the judicial process applied to Donald Trump's legal cases.
Let's first look at the legal cases against Trump and how is he being treated 'specially' by the U.S. legal and media system. The following are typical headlines in CNN reports:
“Trump’s first criminal trial is a historic and solemn moment for America”.
“The United States will cross a historic threshold on 4/22/2024 when for the first time a former president goes on criminal trial in a case laced with fateful significance because Donald Trump could be back in the Oval Office next year.”
This report has clearly shown that Trump's case is given a “special' treatment by the media and DOJ. This is the first of his four criminal cases, Trump was indicted in New York City on March 30, 2023, on charges involving paying hush money to silence a scandal about an extramarital affair that arose during his first presidential campaign in 2016.
The indictment states that Trump falsified his company's internal records to hide the hush money paid to his lawyer, Michael Cohen, who helped cover up Trump’s extramarital affairs with two women, porn star Stormy Daniels and Playboy model Karen McDougal (who claimed they had extramarital sexual encounters with Trump years earlier), as well as another story by a Trump Tower doorman claiming to have a story about Trump's illegit child out of wedlock. Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, a Democrat (rarely identified in news reports), indicted Trump to face criminal charges for falsifying the money reimbursed to Michael Cohen as legal fees. The timing of this case and the publicity it generated shows that Trump is treated 'specially' not as an ordinary individual. The court seems to gauge the time in prosecuting this case; the court is presently rushed to conduct the process of selecting the jurors to get the prosecution going in a week or two, six months before the November presidential election.
Trump is also charged in Georgia and Washington DC for plotting to overturn his 2020 presidential election loss. The Georgia case involves his action in urging people to question Georgia's vote counts and the Washington DC case is suggesting that Trump had incited the January 6th protest storming the capitol building. These civil charges are political relating to elections, yet the judge denies Trump's effort to delay the court prosecution so he can devote time to his 2024 election campaign. How hard is it for the judge to decide whether Trump's speech on January 6th had specifically urged his supporters to march to the capitol to protest as an official presidential order or a personal view related to his re-election campaign? Our constitution gives everyone, including the President, the freedom of speech, especially political speech. In this country, we have people advocating the secession of a state from the United States and we also have people advocating Independence for Texas, California, or Hawaii. These people are protected by our constitution, are they not?!
Trump has lost a civil case with a fine over $400 million and still faces 91 felony counts across two state courts and two different federal districts, any of which could potentially produce a prison sentence. Incredibly so many cases are charged against Donald Trump, fraud, hush money, election subversion, and classified documents in Mar-a-Largo residence, should we praise the DOJ for diligence or blame the DOJ for waiting so long to take action? Whether or not one supports Trump for President, one should give Trump a fair chance to campaign for re-election, and a fair fight against his Democrat opponent. Why is it only the Democrat prosecutors and judges pursuing charges against Trump while he is winning the Republican presidential nomination? Shouldn't Democrats be excused to take on the cases to avoid being impartial? Shouldn't these cases be delayed until after the election?
Donald Trump is not above the law but prosecuting the cases against him currently is suspicious of political motivation, particularly when he is a successful presidential candidate. President Biden's mishandling of classified documents wasn't charged, why should Trump be charged before his re-election bid against Biden? The scandal cases against Trump were old cases raised before his presidency (2016-2020). Why wasn't he pardoned like President Clinton committing a scandal while in the White House? As an opposition party candidate for the presidency, supported by most Republicans and by a large popular vote, can't the DOJ at least postpone these cases until after the election? If Trump were not re-elected, the DOJ could prosecute the cases against him as a citizen. If he were re-elected, shouldn't he deserve a chance to be pardoned, if the Americans want him to run the country?
This author had written before and commented specifically about the U.S. judiciary system regarding the Foreign Corruption Protection Act (FCPA), for example, the notorious Alston case and many other cases as well as the International Emergency Economic Power Act (IEEPA); for example, the recent notorious case - the Huawei's financial executive Ms. Meng Wan Zhou case. Ms. Meng was being pursued by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Division of Homeland Security department and the U.S. Justice Department. The U.S. Congress often enacts laws proposed by the Administration, the enacted laws then allow the Administration to prosecute the 'violators' of the laws through the justice department (JOD). These actions were termed as U.S. long-arm law enforcement in the international arena. Long-arm of course implies that the U.S. jurisdiction is far-reaching to foreign countries regardless of their legal systems. In Alston's case, the company was eventually closed and sold to a US company. In Huawei's case, Ms. Meng was released after three years of house arrest in Canada. Huawei company's 5G products were banned in the U.S. and elsewhere because of the U.S. accusation of a potential national security threat. These past cases are evidence that the U.S. judiciary system is highly political and subject to governmental influence.
In this writing, the author will discuss the subject matter under US domestic jurisdiction but anticipating its important international impact, that is the legal cases against the U.S. presidential candidate, Donald Trump. Trump, the former U.S. President, is nearly the De-facto Republican Party's nominee for the 2024 presidential election. However, Trump is facing multiple legal cases against him while he is working hard on his campaign to win the presidency in 2024. We are not here to judge Donald Trump on his business conduct, personal behavior, or patriotism (that is for the society and American people to determine.) What we will discuss is the operation of the American judiciary system, in handling Donald Trump's cases - whether the system should avoid being influenced by national politics or the government. In a fair democratic system, no one is above the law, but the law must be fair and equal for everyone regardless of the person's fame, fortune, or political and religious belief. In facing legal prosecution, Donald Trump seems to get more than a fair share of attention from the DOJ compared to an ordinary citizen. The intense 'attention' came from the DOJ despite its backlog of cases and the attention also came from the media amid presidential campaign activities. These attentions are not giving Trump preferential treatment but extra harassment. All in all, it appears that there is an 'invisible' influence on the judicial process applied to Donald Trump's legal cases.
Let's first look at the legal cases against Trump and how is he being treated 'specially' by the U.S. legal and media system. The following are typical headlines in CNN reports:
“Trump’s first criminal trial is a historic and solemn moment for America”.
“The United States will cross a historic threshold on 4/22/2024 when for the first time a former president goes on criminal trial in a case laced with fateful significance because Donald Trump could be back in the Oval Office next year.”
This report has clearly shown that Trump's case is given a “special' treatment by the media and DOJ. This is the first of his four criminal cases, Trump was indicted in New York City on March 30, 2023, on charges involving paying hush money to silence a scandal about an extramarital affair that arose during his first presidential campaign in 2016.
The indictment states that Trump falsified his company's internal records to hide the hush money paid to his lawyer, Michael Cohen, who helped cover up Trump’s extramarital affairs with two women, porn star Stormy Daniels and Playboy model Karen McDougal (who claimed they had extramarital sexual encounters with Trump years earlier), as well as another story by a Trump Tower doorman claiming to have a story about Trump's illegit child out of wedlock. Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, a Democrat (rarely identified in news reports), indicted Trump to face criminal charges for falsifying the money reimbursed to Michael Cohen as legal fees. The timing of this case and the publicity it generated shows that Trump is treated 'specially' not as an ordinary individual. The court seems to gauge the time in prosecuting this case; the court is presently rushed to conduct the process of selecting the jurors to get the prosecution going in a week or two, six months before the November presidential election.
Trump is also charged in Georgia and Washington DC for plotting to overturn his 2020 presidential election loss. The Georgia case involves his action in urging people to question Georgia's vote counts and the Washington DC case is suggesting that Trump had incited the January 6th protest storming the capitol building. These civil charges are political relating to elections, yet the judge denies Trump's effort to delay the court prosecution so he can devote time to his 2024 election campaign. How hard is it for the judge to decide whether Trump's speech on January 6th had specifically urged his supporters to march to the capitol to protest as an official presidential order or a personal view related to his re-election campaign? Our constitution gives everyone, including the President, the freedom of speech, especially political speech. In this country, we have people advocating the secession of a state from the United States and we also have people advocating Independence for Texas, California, or Hawaii. These people are protected by our constitution, are they not?!
Trump has lost a civil case with a fine over $400 million and still faces 91 felony counts across two state courts and two different federal districts, any of which could potentially produce a prison sentence. Incredibly so many cases are charged against Donald Trump, fraud, hush money, election subversion, and classified documents in Mar-a-Largo residence, should we praise the DOJ for diligence or blame the DOJ for waiting so long to take action? Whether or not one supports Trump for President, one should give Trump a fair chance to campaign for re-election, and a fair fight against his Democrat opponent. Why is it only the Democrat prosecutors and judges pursuing charges against Trump while he is winning the Republican presidential nomination? Shouldn't Democrats be excused to take on the cases to avoid being impartial? Shouldn't these cases be delayed until after the election?
Donald Trump is not above the law but prosecuting the cases against him currently is suspicious of political motivation, particularly when he is a successful presidential candidate. President Biden's mishandling of classified documents wasn't charged, why should Trump be charged before his re-election bid against Biden? The scandal cases against Trump were old cases raised before his presidency (2016-2020). Why wasn't he pardoned like President Clinton committing a scandal while in the White House? As an opposition party candidate for the presidency, supported by most Republicans and by a large popular vote, can't the DOJ at least postpone these cases until after the election? If Trump were not re-elected, the DOJ could prosecute the cases against him as a citizen. If he were re-elected, shouldn't he deserve a chance to be pardoned, if the Americans want him to run the country?
RSS Feed