US Sutra | Donald Trump’s conviction: Campaign booster or political Waterloo

Thursday, May 30. In a twist that feels ripped straight from the pages of history, the legal troubles surrounding former US President Donald J Trump reached a boiling point. The situation prompted analysts and observers across the spectrum to ask: will Trump’s conviction serve as his political Waterloo or transform into a surprising campaign booster as we edge closer to another photo-finish presidential election.

As the nation watched in stunned disbelief, Trump was pronounced guilty on 34 counts of felony for falsifying financial records. The highly publicised month-long trial in a Manhattan courtroom, not too far from the famed Trump Towers in New York city, held him guilty for trying to cover up money paid to porn performer Stormy Daniels. To buy her silence on his alleged one-night sexual stand with her, which the former president has consistently denied. Trump is the first former president to be convicted of a crime.

The 13-member jury, consisting of five women and seven men, supposed to represent average or ordinary citizens, found him guilty on all counts. The word “guilty” was pronounced 34 times by the foreman. After the initial shock waves that rippled across the courtroom — and the country — the question on everyone’s minds was whether Trump can still hope to come back as the president of the United States? Or was this his Waterloo moment, the end of the road of the political maverick?

According to reports, Trump looked visibly rattled, as he grimaced and slumped somewhat. But on his way out, his habitual swag and defiance, as televised globally, were back. He pumped his fists as he denounced the verdict: “This was a rigged, disgraceful trial. The real verdict is going to be November 5th by the people.”

Outside, in front of the waiting television cameras, media persons, and the clearly divided public, the reactions were equally contrary. Some shouted “Justice served” or “Lock him up.” Others, raising pro-Trump slogans, claimed that the verdict was a foregone conclusion given how hated Trump was in New York city, for long a Democratic bastion.

Justice Juan Merchan, the presiding judge, himself a Democrat, who is known to have made contributions to the party, has scheduled sentencing for July 11. On the eve of the Republican National Convention. Going by the book, fudging records is what is termed a low-level felony. It carries no compulsory imprisonment. Trump has no prior criminal record, and this conviction is not for a violent crime.

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin L Bragg, Jr, who led the prosecution against Trump on behalf of the State of New York, announced the verdict as follows: “Donald Trump is guilty of repeatedly and fraudulently falsifying business records in a scheme to conceal damaging information from American voters during the 2016 presidential election. Over the course of the past several weeks, a jury of 12 every day New Yorkers was presented with overwhelming evidence — including invoices, checks, bank statements, audio recordings, phone logs, text messages, and direct testimony from 22 witnesses — that proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr Trump illegally falsified 34 New York business records.”

The statement is quite blunt, mincing no words : “Mr Trump went to illegal lengths to lie repeatedly in order to protect himself and his campaign. In Manhattan, we follow the facts without fear or favor and have a solemn responsibility to ensure equal justice under the law regardless of the background, wealth or power of the accused. The integrity of our judicial system depends on upholding that principle”. I have quoted from it at length because the rest of it reads like a detailed scandal sheet on the former president’s other alleged, often sexual, misdemeanours.

Given the probable reaction against too severe a punishment, Judge Merchan will have to weigh his options carefully. Will he impose a fine, community service, or probation, or actually put the former president in jail or house arrest? But regardless of how severe the sentence handed down to him, Trump is sure to appeal. The case may drag on for months, even years. In the meanwhile, the US presidential elections will already be upon us.

Trump supporters rallied behind their beleaguered mascot. Apparently, his official website crashed. On account of the volume of traffic in Trump’s support, a good deal of it financial, that flowed into his campaign kitty. Trump has used the victim card to his advantage in the past. But an actual conviction? It is believed that it might sway a small section of Republicans actually to turn away from Trump. Enough for him to lose his re-election bid? That no one is willing to stick their neck out on.

In the past, high-profile indictments the world over have led to varying political outcomes. The notion of a legal battle serving as a political noose or a rallying cry is not new, but Trump’s case is unprecedented in the American context due to his still sizeable base and polarised political climate. Trump’s unique brand and his unparalleled grip on the Republican party set him apart. This situation raises the question: does the indictment represent an insurmountable obstacle or a peculiar form of political ammunition?

The commentariat is also divided on the impact of the verdict. Some suggest that it will galvanise Trump’s supporters, who see him as a martyr unjustly persecuted by a politically motivated and tainted legal system. Trump’s own statements have promoted such a narrative and are amplified by like-minded media outlets, where the trials are often portrayed as an attack on Trump by a biased establishment.

Conversely, other outlets have leaned on the gravity of the legal accusations, emphasising the potential of this conviction permanently to damage Trump’s political ambitions. Leading newspapers have published both perspectives, with individual columnists weighing in on whether this is the beginning of the end for Trump or only a rallying point for his fervent and fervid supporters.

Clearly, Trump has divided the nation as no former president before him, with the exception of Abraham Lincoln. But on causes that seem to be far less portentous than slavery or civil rights. America’s bifurcated response to Trump’s trials will only be resolved after November 4th presidential elections are done and dusted.

In a political saga filled with twists and turns, Donald Trump’s indictment stands out as a pivotal moment. Whether it marks the beginning of the end of his political career or serves as a catalyst for a resurgence remains to be seen. Whatever the outcome, this will be a chapter remembered in American political history, dissected by pundits, scholars, and citizens for generations to come.

But one thing is certain: the verdict of the people will be far more telling than that of the New York Supreme Court. Trump knows this only too well and has said as much already.