Summary: Donald Trump, the leading GOP presidential candidate, has been found guilty of falsifying business records related to hush money payments to Stormy Daniels.

-Trump was accused of misrepresenting these payments as legal fees on tax forms.

-His supporters claim the charges are politically motivated "lawfare," while critics argue the legal process is fair.

-The sentencing is set just days before the Republican National Convention, intensifying the controversy.

-Trump's legal challenges highlight deep political divides and raise questions about the fairness and timing of legal proceedings against political figures.

-We are now living in a country where the candidate for president for one of the two main political parties has been found guilty of a crime and is due to possibly face jail time. 

Donald Trump Found Guilty in Hush Money Case: Political Firestorm Ensues

In this case, Donald Trump was found guilty of having paid “hush money” to the adult film star, Stormy Daniels, in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election in which Trump was to become the GOP candidate that year. The hush money in question was to keep the adult film star quiet over an affair the two allegedly had in 2006, where they both attended a celebrity golf tournament at Lake Tahoe.

The world awaits to see what the exact sentence will be.

In fact, the paying of hush money to a mistress is not a crime. 

And, if it were, basically many major celebrities and political figures throughout history would have been found guilty. 

Donald Trump and the Allegation of Falsifying Business Records 

Where they got Donald Trump was on claims that he had falsified business records. In other words, the accusation—which the jury found convincing enough to convict the former president—was that Trump purposely lied on tax forms about the payment to Stormy Daniels. 

Whereas it was to silence a mistress from talking to the press during a politically sensitive time for Trump, the former president said the money was for lawyer’s fees. Since the money in question came from the Trump Organization, when they filed that expenditure with the IRS, it was labeled as attorney’s fees for then-Trump lawyer, Michael Cohen.

The New York jury convicted Mr. Trump almost based entirely on the testimony of Trump’s former lawyer (who has often been described as “Trump’s fixer”), Michael Cohen. Of course, Cohen himself is a convicted felon. He had an incentive to testify against his former client, Donald Trump. 

Nevertheless, the former president has been found guilty of this crime. 

Lawfare or Law Enforcement? 

Trump’s supporters have labeled the New York “hush money” case, along with the multitude of other Trump cases that are now plaguing the forty-fifth president, as examples of “lawfare.” Lawfare means exactly as it sounds. It means to use the law as a weapon in a conflict. In this case, Trump’s political opponents—the Democrats, President Joe Biden, and the administrative state—have weaponized America’s legal systems to stymie his otherwise unstoppable march to reelection in 2024.

During the New York trial, Trump chafed under what many, not just Trump, considered to be an unconstitutional gag order imposed by the presiding judge in the case, Juan Merchan. 

Forced to pay thousands of dollars every time he publicly ruminated about the hush money case, Trump was further prevented from campaigning for the presidency for the duration of the trial (which is why so many Trump supporters believe this trial was little more than an example of Biden’s ongoing lawfare campaign against Trump).

In terms of sentencing, Trump supporters are further enraged, because the sentencing trial is set for July 11. That’s just four days before Trump is set to officially receive the Republican Party’s nomination to be their presidential candidate at the Republican National Convention. 

Here again is another example of lawfare on display, according to Trump and his supporters.

Meanwhile, those opposed to Trump point to the fact that most white-collar criminal sentencing hearings occur roughly six weeks after verdicts have been handed down. 

Trump was found guilty of 34 separate counts. The crimes were originally misdemeanors that, miraculously, were bumped up to felonies. Who among us can argue that this occurred only because the defendant in question was Donald Trump and the district he was being tried in was overwhelmingly Democrat?

And as for the “hush money” case, Trump supporters further outline how the entire hearing was prejudicial against Trump. 

Beyond the use of Michael Cohen, a convicted felon with an axe to grind against his old boss, Trump, there was the inclusion of Stormy Daniels’ testimony—whose testimony even Judge Merchan was apparently uncomfortable with. 

What’s more, the disgraced former attorney for Stormy Daniels, Michael Avenatti, advised the New York court not to include her or press ahead with the trial.

A Biased Judge Against Donald Trump? 

Meanwhile, Judge Merchan was accused of being biased. These accusations made by the Trump side were not simple grasping-at-straws political theater. Indeed, Judge Merchan did donate small amounts of money to various Democratic Party causes over the years—including to President Biden’s 2020 campaign. 

But the real sticking point for many on the Right is the fact that Judge Merchan’s daughter, Loren, served as president of Authentic Campaigns, which was a campaign consulting group that had a client list that included notable Democratic Party politicians, such as Kamala Harris and Adam Schiff. Loren Merchan’s career would have undoubtedly benefited if she could sell potential Democratic Party clients on the fact that her father basically took Donald Trump down. 

So, whether the Left wants to admit it or not, there were egregious conflicts of interest in this case. Further, this case should have never been brought before the election. 

Those who insisted that this case be brought now ensured that any potential jury pool would be biased against the defendant—Trump—meaning he’d never get a fair trial let alone be able to effectively campaign against President Biden (who, if all things were equal this November, would lose in a landslide to Trump). 

No one is above the law in the United States. Nor should anyone be ground beneath it. Democrats would do well to remember that.

About the Author 

Brandon J. Weichert, a National Interest national security analyst, is a former Congressional staffer and geopolitical analyst who is a contributor at The Washington Times, as well as at American Greatness and the Asia Times. He is the author of Winning Space: How America Remains a Superpower (Republic Book Publishers), Biohacked: China’s Race to Control Life, and The Shadow War: Iran’s Quest for Supremacy. Weichert can be followed via Twitter @WeTheBrandon.

All images are Shutterstock.