A recent New York Times piece shows how much Donald Trump would be hurt by a conviction in his federal election subversion case, but its authors don't go quite far enough, a legal expert wrote.
Former federal prosecutor Joyce Vance highlighted the article, by Norm Eisen, former White House Ethics advisor and special counsel during Trump’s first House impeachment, Celinda Lake, Democratic pollster, and Anat Shenker-Osorio, political researcher and adviser. She said the piece makes "a compelling case for the political impact jury verdicts in the criminal cases against Trump will have."
But it's possible to take the data one step further, according to Vance.
ALSO READ: Marjorie Taylor Greene has Jan. 6 anniversary plans
"I think their argument suggests at more than that as well. The authors appropriately limit themselves to what they have statistical evidence to prove—that a conviction in a criminal case would swing enough Trump voters away to result in his loss at the polls in 2024. I think that data hints at a more compelling conclusion, that those who plan to vote for Trump can be swayed even without trials if they come to believe he committed criminal acts," Vance wrote on her Civil Discourse Substack. "A jury’s verdict isn’t the only kind of proof that can convince people to reject Trump’s candidacy. Now that indictments are public and much of the evidence is available it should be possible to persuade folks Trump committed a crime through means short of a jury verdict."
She goes on to say that the authors "point out voters are sophisticated enough to understand the difference between mere allegations and proof and that Americans’ familiarity with the jury system through participation in it means that its integrity is trusted."
"So, Godspeed to the courts. But based on this analysis, we should consider taking the idea further," Vance said in the post dated for Dec. 27. "If all Trump voters truly believe the prosecutions are a political witch hunt, convictions alone would be unable to change their minds. A jury’s verdict is perhaps the best way to help people reject candidate Trump. But it is not the only one."
