Top Trump Enemy Has Staggering Assessment After Indictment Is Unsealed, Leaves CNN Viewers Stunned


Over the past few days, ever since it was first reported that Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg was definitely going to be charging former President Donald Trump over payments made to porn star Stormy Daniels in the midst of the 2016 presidential race, every conservative who has that One Liberal Friend™ has doubtlessly heard this refrain on social media: “Wait for it to be unsealed.”

Sure, 34 counts of financial fraud sounded like a lot for what would normally be a misdemeanor in New York state. Sure, the conjecture about how Bragg waved a Hogwart’s wand and turned them into federal felony charges — thus meaning the statute of limitations on those misdemeanors hadn’t run out — sounded dubious, considering Bragg has no federal jurisdiction.

But wait for Tuesday, liberals said. Wait for it to be unsealed. Then you’ll see.

We saw, all right. It was exactly what we predicted. Donald Trump is facing 34 counts of exactly the same charge: Falsifying business records in the first degree.

The only surprise, I suppose, was including allegations in the prosecution’s “statements of fact” that there payments made to another woman who wasn’t porn star Stormy Daniels as well as to a former Trump Tower doorman to suppress a story about the doorman’s claim that Trump had fathered a love child.

It's Biblical: Carson Highlights That Every Democratic Scheme Has Backfired in Trump's Favor

And the argument Bragg used was exactly what had been predicted: These non-disclosure payments were used to conceal a federal campaign finance violation.

How unimpressive was this? Remember former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, the swamp creature whose relationship with Donald Trump was so acrimonious that Trump made a point of having him fired in March 2018 by then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions the day before McCabe was eligible for his full pension? Yeah, even he thinks this is bogus.

Appearing on CNN, McCabe called the unsealing of the indictment a “disappointment” and said the legal logic Bragg is relying on “simply isn’t there.”

“If I had to characterize it, it’s disappointment,” McCabe told CNN’s Jake Tapper.

“I think everyone was hoping we would see more about the direction that they intend to take this prosecution. What is the legal theory that ties that very solid misdemeanor case, 34 counts of misdemeanors, to the intent to conceal another crime, which is what makes it a felony?” he continued.

“It simply isn’t there. Now, it’s possible that the DA has an elaborate and solid theory that’s backed up by a lot of evidence, and he has just decided to conceal that at this point. That would be a strange decision on his part, but nevertheless I’m giving him the benefit of the doubt.

It's Biblical: Carson Highlights That Every Democratic Scheme Has Backfired in Trump's Favor

“At the end of the day if all of our legal friends read this indictment and don’t see a way to have felony, it’s hard to imagine convincing a jury that they should get there.”

Well, that’s going to stun more than a few CNN viewers.

Now, a bit of a refresher: McCabe, once former FBI Director James Comey’s right-hand man, was dismissed after admitting he lied to investigators who were looking into leaks regarding a story about Hillary Clinton’s emails in 2016. Turns out the leaker was, uh, McCabe himself.

Should Donald Trump have been indicted?

A 2018 report by Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz found McCabe “misled” investigators and “lacked candor” when talking with them.

As CNN noted, McCabe was formally fired by before his scheduled retirement in 2018, robbing him of his pension. He would later get it back in a 2021 settlement with the Department of Justice, a development Trump called “yet another mockery to our Country.”

When McCabe was fired, the then-president called the dismissal “A great day for Democracy.”

Just so we’re clearer, here’s a further sampler of what the former president thought of McCabe when he was in office —  even after he was fired:

Nor is this a case of unrequited loathing. In 2019, McCabe told CBS News’ “60 Minutes” he’d discussed removing Trump via the 25th Amendment with other Justice Department officials and had moved to protect the Russiagate hoax investigation at all costs after James Comey was fired as FBI director in May 2017.

“I was speaking to the man who had just run for the presidency and won the election for the presidency, and who might have done so with the aid of the government of Russia, our most formidable adversary on the world stage,” McCabe said. “And that was something that troubled me greatly.”

“I was very concerned that I was able to put the Russia case on absolutely solid ground in an indelible fashion that, were I removed quickly or reassigned or fired, that the case could not be closed or vanish in the night without a trace,” he added.

It’s been seven years since the report that spurred the Russia collusion theory, which turned out to be a shoddy piece of opposition research by Hillary Clinton’s team, was first brought into the DOJ mix. Barely a single word of it — not even the definite articles — has been proven to have merit, and most of it has been debunked. McCabe had to know just how threadbare this was when he gave this interview.

Nevertheless, he persisted — or at least pretended to.

But I digress. I believe I’ve sketched a rough outline of how these two men feel about each other. Upon seeing Donald Trump making an appearance as a defendant in a New York City courtroom, one might expect McCabe to be doing cartwheels behind Jake Tapper during CNN’s coverage.

Instead, he saw what we all saw: The legal justification to indict a former president on these charges “simply isn’t there.”

My guess is that your One Liberal Friend™ won’t be posting this clip to his Twitter feed or Facebook timeline now that the indictment has been unsealed. He/she/zhe must have missed it, naturally. But be a pal, and pass it on.

Rest assured, the icy silence you’ll get is merely gratitude.

Truth and Accuracy

Submit a Correction →

We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.

, , , , , , ,
C. Douglas Golden is a writer who splits his time between the United States and Southeast Asia. Specializing in political commentary and world affairs, he's written for Conservative Tribune and The Western Journal since 2014.
C. Douglas Golden is a writer who splits his time between the United States and Southeast Asia. Specializing in political commentary and world affairs, he's written for Conservative Tribune and The Western Journal since 2014. Aside from politics, he enjoys spending time with his wife, literature (especially British comic novels and modern Japanese lit), indie rock, coffee, Formula One and football (of both American and world varieties).
Morristown, New Jersey
Catholic University of America
Languages Spoken
English, Spanish
Topics of Expertise
American Politics, World Politics, Culture