Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Trump has called it that in a transparent effort to delegitimize the proceedings, a typical move for him, and many of his supporters have repeated it. I'd be more curious to know if Sebby himself thinks it was a kangaroo political trial, and, if so, why, and what he would have done differently as the judge. If not, I wonder why Sebby is choosing to repeat nonsense with which he disagrees.
|
This is actually two questions.
First, was the prosecution a kangaroo/banana republic political decision? Yes. Unequivocally. Even Andrew Cuomo has called it an embarrassment. It was nakedly political and there is no dispute on that. Don’t even attempt to justify it. You’ll only embarrass yourself. Bragg’s predecessor wouldn’t bring the case. And Bragg campaigned on “getting Trump.”
Second, we come to the trial. Was that a kangaroo proceeding? I don’t think so. The judge and jury did what they were supposed to do. Was it an improper forum? Probably. But Trump has preserved the argument that he could not receive a fair trial for appeal. So again, technically not unfair.
Apologists for the nakedly political motive behind the prosecution will try to conflate these two things. As if “The trial was fairly administered!” is a retort to the argument the decision to prosecute was obviously political.
