It's a Cult, Part One.

There are no "politics" behind Donald Trump's conviction in a New York courtroom. That is a false narrative supported by him and his minions, and by right-wing media outlets. There's is absolutely no evidence to support this contention. None. 

First of all, the Federal government holds no sway whatsoever in what goes on in a state courtroom. None. Here's how the process works:

State officials in their department of Justice suspect a crime has been committed. They collect evidence of that suspected wrongdoing. They then convene a grand jury made up of 16-23 normal folks chosen randomly from the pool of potential jurors in the state. These grand jurors examine the evidence from MULTIPLE possible crimes (not just Trump's) presented by the prosecutors, and determine which of those warrant an indictment. 

The grand jury in Trump's case, and again these are average folks like you and me, made the determination that Trump should be indicted based solely upon the evidence presented. He was. 

Now another jury of normal folks is chosen randomly from the jury pool to decide his guilt or innocence. Lawyers from each side can decide to eliminate a certain number of jurors if they are unhappy with that person for any reason. Both sides used their exemptions.

If you never served in a jury, let me assure you that the very process makes you extremely focused on doing the right thing, and rendering a verdict based upon the evidence. It is a solemn duty, and you can feel it. 

Although the judge is presiding over the case, he or she really does not determine guilt or innocence. His or her role is to basically make certain that the law is followed and that the lawyers do not do anything untoward while presenting their cases. It is possible, but extremely unlikely that a judge will ever affect the actual outcome of a case. 

Judge Marchan did nothing of note to hamstring Trump's case. He simply did his job. Legal experts have confirmed this. This is in contrast to Judge Cannon, who's strange rulings so far have confounded the experts.

So the case went to trial and both sides presented their cases. Trump had every opportunity to testify, but refused to do so. He was sanctioned by the court several times for statements made outside of court, statements that put the lives of the judge and others at risk. But when it came time to speak under oath and defend himself, he refused. This is not uncommon in criminal trial for various reasons.

The jury then examined the evidence presented and found him guilty on all 34 counts of the indictment, fair and square. There was no collusion. There was no foul play. There was no federal interference. If there had been evidence of such, you can bet the house it would have come out by now. Trump's minions would have made that a certainty. The evidence against him was simply overwhelming.

If you don't believe this and have no facts to back up your opinion, you are probably in a cult. If there was evidence to the contrary, we would have seen it. Your opinion or anyone else's is not evidence. 

If you vote for Trump, you are voting for a righteously convicted felon for the highest office in the land. 

Live with it.