Trump Indictment Triggers a Torrent of B.S.
Trump lawyers take to the airways with insults, lies, and mischaracterizations
It's 5:45 am, and I should be sleeping. Instead, after falling asleep on the couch with the TV on, I awoke at 4:45 to the sound of one of Trump's lawyers abusing a CNN news anchor. When asked a simple question of fact, he responded by insulting her. It went something like this:
The news anchor asks a question.
Lawyer says:
I'm not going to answer that question. You know I can't answer that question. I think you know better than that. What I can tell you is that these charges against Trump are "turning justice on its head." Donald Trump is being "singled out" for treatment "no other president has ever been subjected to." Obama has “thousands of documents” in Chicago, but "only Trump is being accused." This is all political. “He’s done nothing wrong.” Blah, blah, blah.
The news anchor lets him finish, thanks him for his time, and quickly moves on to a commercial break. She is visibly embarrassed, not because she misbehaved — she is embarrassed because she has no idea how to respond.
"Messaging" is not fact-finding
The anchor at 4:45 this morning could not counter the tirade Trump's lawyer subjected her to because she hasn't been appropriately trained. If she had, she would have responded to the propaganda her guest spewed by reminding her audience that Trump's criminal behavior is unprecedented.
That's why the DOJ, the SDNY district attorney, the Fulton County, Georgia D.A., and the special counsel, Jack Smith, are all investigating Donald Trump.
If she understood what we used to call "journalistic integrity," she would have highlighted the difference between the messaging Trump and his cronies use to mislead people and fact-based evidence. And let's face it, there is no shortage of fact-based evidence demonstrating criminal activity by Trump.
We have it on tape "I just need 11,000 votes — come on!" We have it on video "You've gotta fight like hell, or you won't have a country anymore." And we have it on record, in the form of a grand jury (not Democrats or cable news hosts or any of Trump's known enemies) who voted to indict Trump on over 30 counts of business fraud.
While it's important to remember that we are all "innocent until proven guilty," we know the Trump organization has already been found guilty of fraud. Trump's buddy and finance guy, Alan Weisselberg, is in prison on Riker's Island right now, serving time for crimes committed while employed by Trump.
Michael Cohen, Trump's oft-vilified former lawyer and "fixer," also went to prison for actions he took at Donald Trump's behest. But the interviewer cited none of this during or directly after Trump's lawyer manipulated her into ending the interview — but not before he embarrassed her with insults, followed by lies and subterfuge, which she left hanging in the air — uncontested. This is why I can't sleep.
What happened to journalistic integrity?
I don't know where it went, but journalistic integrity disappeared when Donald Trump became president.
When I was trained as a journalist, we took the job seriously. We had a responsibility to the truth.
We read about it, talked about it, and practiced it. We were given examples of how to conduct an interview and ask questions designed to elicit facts and cut through nonsense. There was always one goal: uncover the truth and spread it.
Today, as the Dominion v. FOX case shows, the goal is to make money, truth be damned. Maybe that's what happened to journalistic integrity — there's no money in it.
What happened to Republicans in Congress?
The Republicans running the shit show they call the "Committee to Investigate the Weaponization of Government" demonstrate the same affliction.
So far, they have refused to allow Democrats on the committee to question witnesses. Instead, their goal is messaging — no effort is spared in pushing a false narrative. The supposed purpose of the committee is to discover the truth — but they are hiding from it.
Like the lawyer on CNN this morning, the Republicans in Congress (not all, but the ones running the committees — Jim Jordan being the most powerful) rely on volume, petulance, accusations, and insults, but they don't provide facts — they run from them.
John Kelly, one of Trump's many former chiefs of staff, wrote in his recently published book that Trump constantly encouraged him to use the powers at the DOJ to go after his political enemies. But, as we've seen throughout the twice-impeached ex-president's term in office, accusations made by Trump are almost always done to deflect attention from the actions of Donald J. Trump.
Biden never stole an election, but there is evidence that Trump did — not just the attempt in 2020, but when he won in 2016. So yes, he got the votes, but he would never have been able to do it without the weaponization of the internet and the help of the Internet Research Agency based in St. Petersburg, Russia.
Why the Stormy Daniels case is relevant
I don't care who Donald Trump slept with. I don't even like knowing who he slept with. I think he's the most offensive and unattractive human being alive. The thought of him having sex makes me want to throw up in my mouth — but I digress.
This case, which he's just been indicted for, isn't about who Trump shtups. It's about using money to quash the truth that might otherwise have cost Trump the election.
The 30+ counts of business fraud (details of which we expect to learn on Tuesday when, presumably, Trump will turn himself in) are about fraudulent behavior related to money — money categorized as legal fees when it was actually "hush money" paid to deceive the public before the 2016 election.
It would have been better if the DOJ had re-opened the case involving Russian interference in the election and Trump's attempts at obstruction of justice — of which there are many. But for now, this is what we have.
When a person commits so many crimes, it's hard to track them; the system gets bogged down. I'm guessing that's why it's taken so long to get to this point — and we're still waiting for indictments in other cases that point to criminal liability for Trump.
The media needs to step up and refuse to allow the case to be tried in public
There is a simple, appropriate response to the Trump strategy: call them on it. Ask for facts, not fiction. If Trump's representatives insist on spreading rumors and obfuscating rather than responding to legitimate questions, remind the audience that the trial will be conducted in court and the evidence will be presented without fanfare or histrionics.
Nothing Trump's lawyers say today, tomorrow, or any time while on camera will affect the trial's outcome. Only when Trump goes before a jury to plead his case will we hear anything resembling truth from Trump's lawyers, his cronies, or Trump (though I suspect Trump will spew incomprehensible word salads if he’s ever allowed to testify.)
The bottom line: If it's not said under oath, it doesn't count. Repeat that. Again. And again. And again.
Our country made history yesterday when Trump was indicted. For the first time in my life, I'm hoping history repeats itself. Stay tuned.
L.A.’s Newsletter is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.