Jurors Gripped by Fear. Is it a Former President or a Mob Boss in the Dock?

Jurors Gripped by Fear. Is it a Former President or a Mob Boss in the Dock?

By Mary Jones | Wednesday, May 29, 2024 | 5 min read

Former FBI director likens President Donald Trump to a mafia boss

Donald Trump's criminal trial in Manhattan has been marked by his vocal dissatisfaction with various aspects of the proceedings. He has expressed grievances about: the Judge, prosecutors, their relatives, witnesses, the jurors and the Media. These criticisms are part of a broader strategy by Trump to cast doubt on the fairness and legitimacy of the trial, a tactic he has used in various legal and political contexts.

Donald Trump's trial is historic as it marks the first criminal case against a former U.S. president. The charges stem from allegations that he fraudulently covered up pre-election hush money payments to Stormy Daniels in 2016 to keep voters unaware of their alleged affair. This case has drawn parallels to prosecutions of organized crime figures due to the nature of the allegations involving fraudulent actions to conceal illicit activities. Despite the unprecedented nature of this trial, it underscores the principle that no one is above the law, even a former president.

Interestingly, Donald Trump himself has drawn parallels between his situation and that of organized crime figures, despite being quick to complain about various aspects of his trial. He has repeatedly likened his prosecution to that of gangsters, possibly as part of his broader strategy to frame the charges against him as a politically motivated witch hunt. This comparison might be intended to evoke a sense of victimization and to rally his supporters by portraying himself as being unfairly targeted by the legal system.

Donald Trump has indeed drawn comparisons between himself and notorious gangster Al Capone, both at public events and on social media. At a conservative conference in February, Trump boasted, "I’ve been indicted more than Alphonse Capone," though this claim is false, albeit close. He has regularly and admiringly referenced Capone at his MAGA rallies. For example, at a rally in Iowa in October, he praised Capone by saying, “He was seriously tough, right?” Additionally, Trump referred to Capone on social media as "the late great gangster," a statement that raised eyebrows due to its seemingly admiring tone. This comparison appears to be part of Trump's strategy to present himself as a resilient figure unfairly targeted by the authorities.

The parallels between Donald Trump's trial and that of a mob boss might seem amusing at first glance, but the underlying seriousness cannot be overlooked. As the trial progresses into its third week, the contrast between the somber courthouse setting and Trump's typical opulent surroundings highlights the gravity of the situation. The similarities between his trial and those of organized crime figures are indeed disturbing, reflecting the significant legal and ethical implications at stake. This trial, taking place in a modest courthouse, underscores the fundamental principle that all individuals, regardless of their status, are subject to the rule of law.

The fact that Donald Trump is tied or even ahead of President Biden in the polls, despite the ongoing criminal trial, reflects the deep polarization and complexities of contemporary American politics. Many of his supporters view the charges against him as politically motivated and remain steadfast in their loyalty. However, it is possible that as the details of the trial and the associated scandals become more widely known, Trump could face political repercussions.

One of the most distressing aspects of the trial is the concern for juror safety, a situation commonly associated with cases involving violent organized crime. The jurors' identities are kept secret to protect them from potential intimidation or harm, and there has already been an incident where a juror was dismissed due to fear. Former federal prosecutor Joyce Vance highlighted the severity of the situation by noting that she has only seen such levels of trepidation in cases involving violent organized crime, emphasizing the gravity and unprecedented nature of Trump's trial. This fear underscores the extraordinary and troubling circumstances surrounding this historic case.

Indeed, this is not the first time that concerns for juror safety have arisen in cases involving Donald Trump. In January, during the civil trial where jurors found that Trump defamed writer E. Jean Carroll following her successful lawsuit for sexual assault, their identities were also withheld. After the trial, federal Judge Lewis A. Kaplan issued a stark warning to the jurors, advising them to never disclose their involvement in the case. This chilling advice underscores the serious and unprecedented nature of these trials, where the potential for intimidation or harm to jurors is a real concern. The need to protect jurors' identities in such high-profile cases highlights the extraordinary measures required to ensure a fair trial in the face of intense public scrutiny and potential threats.

Former prosecutor and FBI general counsel Andrew Weissmann noted on MSNBC that the last time he heard a judge caution jurors similarly was decades ago, after they convicted Genovese crime family boss Vincent Gigante. Weissmann remarked on the significance of this comparison, stating, “It is remarkable that that same admonition was said with respect to somebody who was the president of the United States.”

This situation is indeed tragic. Donald Trump, who once swore to uphold the rule of law as president, is now perceived by many as making a mockery of it and endangering innocents and civil servants. The protective measures taken for jurors in his trial underscore the gravity of the situation and the extraordinary nature of a former president being involved in such serious legal proceedings. This contrast highlights the profound implications of his actions and the impact on the integrity of the judicial system.

The concern for witnesses' safety in Donald Trump's trial is another significant issue. Prosecutors have chosen not to share their witness list with Trump's defense team, a precautionary measure that is not typical in most cases. This decision underscores the serious concerns about potential intimidation or harm to witnesses, reflecting the highly charged and contentious nature of the trial.

During Donald Trump's trial, the concern for witness safety has led to extraordinary measures. Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass explained the rationale behind withholding the witness list from Trump's defense team by stating, "Mr. Trump has been tweeting about the witnesses. We’re not telling them who the witnesses are." This decision reflects the fear that publicizing the names could lead to intimidation or harm, given Trump's history of using social media to target individuals involved in his legal matters.

Judge Juan M. Merchan supported the prosecutors' decision, acknowledging the legitimacy of their concerns. In response to the appeals from Trump's lawyer, Todd Blanche, the judge remarked, "I can’t fault them for that." This exchange highlights the extraordinary precautions being taken to protect the witnesses, emphasizing the trial's highly charged atmosphere and the need to safeguard the integrity of the judicial process. It also illustrates the broader implications of Trump's actions and the environment of intimidation and fear they have created.

The imposition of a gag order by Judge Merchan against Donald Trump is indeed a significant development in the trial. This order prohibits Trump from attacking witnesses, prosecutors, court staff, as well as the families of the judge and District Attorney Alvin Bragg. Such gag orders are rare but not unheard of, and they are typically reserved for cases involving particularly egregious behavior or where there are concerns about witness intimidation.

In this case, the judge and prosecutors have legitimate fears that Trump's inflammatory rhetoric could lead to intimidation of those he has targeted, and potentially even incite violence from some of his more fervent supporters. Given Trump's history of using his platform to target individuals and his ability to mobilize a devoted following, these concerns are not unfounded.

The heavy security around the courthouse further underscores the seriousness of the situation and the need to ensure the safety of all involved in the trial. It is a reflection of the heightened tensions surrounding the proceedings and the potential risks posed by Trump's actions and rhetoric. This trial has brought to the forefront the challenges of upholding the rule of law in the face of intimidation and political polarization.

The parallels between Donald Trump's demeanor in court and that of notorious mob figures like John Gotti are indeed striking. Trump himself has reportedly expressed admiration for Gotti's courtroom demeanor, citing Gotti's defiance and disdainful attitude towards jurors and judges as something he respects.

Reporters in the courtroom have captured Trump's scowls and wise-guy mutterings, reminiscent of the swaggering bravado often associated with figures like Gotti. This behavior reflects Trump's attempt to project an image of strength and defiance in the face of legal proceedings.

The comparison to Gotti underscores the theatrics and bravado that have become hallmarks of Trump's public persona, as well as his willingness to adopt tactics associated with figures outside the bounds of traditional respect for the rule of law. However, it also highlights the dangers of glamorizing such behavior, as it can undermine the integrity of the judicial process and erode public confidence in the legal system.

The connections between Donald Trump's behavior and that of mobsters extend beyond his courtroom demeanor and into his business practices, as highlighted by his former lawyer Michael Cohen's testimony. Cohen, a key witness against Trump, characterized Trump's management of his family company as being akin to that of a mobster. Cohen described himself as Trump's consigliere, acknowledging that he engaged in intimidation and lying on Trump's behalf.

Cohen's testimony shed light on Trump's leadership style, wherein he purportedly communicates in a code that his associates are expected to understand and act upon. This secretive and coded communication style echoes the modus operandi of organized crime figures, where orders are often veiled in ambiguity or euphemisms.

In response to Cohen's testimony, Trump employed mob-like rhetoric, referring to Cohen as "a rat" in a tweet—a term commonly used in mob circles to describe informants or turncoats. This exchange further underscores the parallels between Trump's behavior and that of figures associated with organized crime, highlighting the culture of loyalty, intimidation, and secrecy that has surrounded Trump throughout his career.

David Pecker's testimony during the trial, detailing his cooperation with Trump in 2016 to suppress damaging stories, provides a revealing glimpse into the inner workings of Trump's circle and the lengths to which they would go to protect his image. Pecker's repeated references to Cohen warning him about displeasing "the boss" underscore the hierarchical and authoritarian dynamics at play, reminiscent of the command structures often associated with organized crime syndicates.

Trump's infamous statement in 2016, where he boasted that he could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue without losing any supporters, reflects a chilling confidence in his ability to maintain a loyal base regardless of his actions. This mentality, coupled with the tactics employed during the campaign to suppress negative stories, speaks to a disregard for accountability and a belief in the invincibility of his political standing.

While Trump may indeed retain the support of his MAGA base, the broader implications of his actions should not be overlooked. The trial serves as a stark reminder of the dangers of unchecked power and the erosion of democratic norms. Regardless of the trial's outcome, it is crucial for the public to remain vigilant and determined to prevent individuals with mafia tendencies from holding high office in the future. By confronting and condemning such behavior, we can strive to uphold the principles of accountability, transparency, and integrity in our political system.