Excerpt:
"The target might have been Trump, but the real goal was to influence the 2024 election, no matter the shaky facts and dubious legal theories of the case. Democracy must be saved even through unlawful and unethical means. The enemies of society must be hunted, the obstacles to progress must be destroyed.

As the years-long Trump investigation and prosecution continued, and as New Yorkers continue to deal with rampant crime and theft and felony assaults – which they often don’t even report due to “the revolving-door criminal injustice system” – Trump was pursued with rare intensity. The bodega shopkeepers, facing a shoplifting and armed robbery epidemic which empties their shelves and puts their lives at risk, are besides themselves. As are normal citizens whose safety is at risk daily. If only their interests were political. If only the perpetrator were the Republican presidential frontrunner and not a career criminal then perhaps they would see justice.

In trial, venue matters. It’s strategic, it’s the selection of a favorable judge and jury. Monsanto is sued in San Fransisco and the jury pours them out for $289 million. Cook County (Illinois) is notorious for high jury verdicts. So too is Philadelphia and Lansing, Michigan. Corporate defendants tremble in fear at being sued in working class cities along the Gulf coast. Texas brings suit against the Biden Administration in the Southern District of Texas – Galveston Division because the one federal district judge there (a Trump appointee) will not hesitate to stop unlawful acts or policies. Hawaii brought suit in Honolulu against the Trump Administration and obtained a temporary restraining order against Trump’s travel ban from an Obama-appointed judge. He was reversed by the Supreme Court, but that process took over a year.

Bragg brought his case in a Democratic stronghold which voted overwhelmingly for Biden in 2020 (87% Biden to 12% Trump). Bring this case upstate and you might get a different result. The jurors walked into the courthouse with biases against President Trump (so powerful were these prejudices that some prospective jurors lied to try to get selected), and their own political preferences were certainly considered when reaching their verdict. It’s human nature. And they followed those biases all the way through to the verdict, ignoring Michael Cohen’s perjury – his outright lies in court – and buying the story from the State that a non-disclosure agreement is a criminal act."