In a recent news article, Paul Craig Roberts argues that the charges brought against former President Trump by corrupt Democrat appointees are solely for propaganda purposes and to sideline a candidate who the Democrats fear will win the next election. According to Roberts, the charges against Trump, which include retaining national security documents without authorization and conspiring to overturn the election, have no basis in law and are reminiscent of Stalin’s purge trials in the 1930s.
Roberts questions the likelihood of a President of the United States committing numerous felonies resulting in four separate felony trials. He points out that real crimes, such as those committed during the Vietnam War and the revelations of war crimes by Manning, did not lead to indictments of responsible administration figures.
One of the charges against Trump is related to his retention of classified documents. Roberts explains that presidents and presidential appointees are allowed copies of their work in office, and among the documents packed up for Trump, there were allegedly 31 classified documents. However, Roberts argues that no evidence has been provided to show that Trump knew what was in the boxes, and after they were seized, anything could have been added. He questions the credibility of the FBI, considering their history of lies and scandals.
Roberts also criticizes the charge that Trump conspired to impair the counting of votes by challenging the results of the election. He argues that if a candidate challenges vote irregularities, it should not be considered a conspiracy to overturn the election but rather a legitimate request for an honest vote count.
The article mentions two specific prosecutors, Fanni Willis in Atlanta and Alvin Bragg in New York, who have brought charges against Trump. Willis claims that Trump’s request to investigate evidence of electoral fraud in Georgia was a crime, while Bragg charges Trump with 34 felonies for incorrectly reporting a payment to Stormy Daniels. Roberts questions the legitimacy of these charges and argues that the number of charges is inflated to create the perception that Trump is guilty of a multitude of crimes.
Roberts concludes by stating that these charges against Trump are purely political and that the rule of law has been weaponized. He argues that when innocence or guilt depends on personal emotions, the rule of law is dead.