Gilles-William Goldnadel is a lawyer and essayist. Every week, he deciphers the news for FigaroVox. He has just published
War Journal.
It is the West that is being assassinated
(Fayard).
To discover
PODCAST - Listen to the club Le Club Le Figaro Idées with Eugénie Bastié
I write it straight away.
I was far from taking at face value Donald Trump's accusations accusing the American justice system, in the numerous prosecutions against him, of dishonesty tinged with illegality.
Firstly because I am undoubtedly wrong to imagine the legal grass greener elsewhere than in the country where I practice and where the current justice system makes me despair.
Then, because the former president and new American candidate is so inclined to see conspiracies against him everywhere, that, like Peter crying wolf every day, I tended to no longer listen to Donald Trump.
Certainly, I had considered that the inflation of procedures against a tough guy was counterproductive and transformed him into a martyr.
This does not mean that I considered his pursuers, all three democrats, clumsy or, worse still, dishonest.
But I must admit that after reading newspapers like
Le Monde
and the
New York Times
, hardly suspecting excessive "Trumpism", or even the
Wall Street Journal
, I became convinced that the incendiary conspirator was the victim of a legal conspiracy.
Let's start with prosecutor Alvin Bragg.
He had the questionable - and discussed - idea of suing the former, and perhaps future, American president for having paid the sum equivalent to 119,000 euros to a former pornographic film actress with whom he allegedly maintained a business. in principle morally forbidden to a married man.
A disgruntled person could have accused the lady of mediocre blackmail, but it is clear that the American media are not disgruntled and that the woman would come across as a bit of a victim.
And the sum to buy silence having perhaps been paid by a company in the Trump group - according to the declaration of Michael Cohen, Donald Trump's former lawyer, having denounced him to save his skin (which could also cause disappointment) - the prosecutor sees this as an abuse of social property.
It is above all the political and ideological character of the African-American Democratic prosecutor, Letita James, extremely left-wing, which ruins her credibility and authorizes the suspicion of partiality.
Gilles-William Goldnadel
The prosecution of the victim of blackmail, denounced by his lawyer, therefore appears, in these particular conditions, to say the least particularly disproportionate, in view of their cost and their publicity.
But now the article in Le
Monde
writes that the prosecutor Alvin Bragg was only paid “indirectly” by the internationalist billionaire George Soros.
Donald Trump would, however, allow himself to overwhelm him with insults and reproaches, necessarily of an “anti-Semitic” nature.
I don't know in what "indirect" way the New York prosecutor was paid.
But I did not know that a magistrate could be paid, even indirectly, by a bitter opponent of his accused, without being convicted of dependence in the best case and of corruption in the worst case.
Furthermore, I admit that I am each time quite shocked - not to say outraged - when I read that any grievance made against the aforementioned Hungarian billionaire, even if his Jewishness was not mentioned in any way, would constitute anti-Semitism. .
I do not believe that Benjamin Netanyahu - or the author of these lines - benefits from such a privilege.
And it's happy.
Then there is prosecutor Fani Willis, in Georgia, who is prosecuting Donald Trump for the much more serious offense of trying to change the outcome of the elections.
However, we learned that the Democratic prosecutor pursuing the Republican candidate maintained relations with the prosecutor Nathan Wade, who was paid handsomely $650,000 to investigate his famous accused.
The two lovebirds also went to the Caribbean and California to spend a sumptuous vacation.
An Atlanta judge, in an attempt to save Fani Willis, has already brought in his private investigator.
The word banana republic judicial morals might come to mind the least outrageous.
Finally, there is the New York prosecutor, the amazing Letitia James, who is suing the former president for having overestimated the value of his assets, particularly real estate.
Which is contested by the person concerned.
As the journalist from Le
Monde
admits without hesitation , everyone agrees that the excessive demand to ask his accused to pay a bail of 450 million dollars caused him to lose his credit.
But it is above all the political and ideological character of the African-American Democratic prosecutor, extremely left-wing, which ruins her credibility and gives rise to the suspicion of partiality.
It was this prosecutor who described the administration under Donald Trump as
“too masculine, too clear, too vitiated”
.
A judge from our “Wall of Cons” union certainly couldn’t have said it better.
The conspiracy theorist seems to be the victim of a conspiracy by judges who are involuntarily doing him an immense service.
Gilles-William Goldnadel
Worse still, in 2018, during her election campaign for the post, Letita James uttered these strong words against an elected president, still in office:
“I only have one word to say.
Donald Trump, we are going to sue him.
We're going to piss him off.
He will know my name personally
.
We have reached such a point of partiality that the very left-wing
New York Times
was forced to write with a contrived euphemism:
“His outspokenness towards Donald Trump shows the tension between the duty to impartiality of a prosecutor and the political advantages of attacking a Republican
.
And the
Wall Street Journal
, more direct:
“Laetitia James sacrifices the rule of law to have Trump”
.
I add that the three Democratic prosecutors are black and that Trump is not the last to highlight the racialist context of prosecutions carried out, in a framework that is as ideologically biased as it is financially suspect.
To our knowledge, the French public is largely kept in the dark about these extravagant circumstances, for reasons that stem from selective ideological indignation.
We can hate Donald Trump for good reasons, but we must hate even more the fraud, bias and injustice that threaten us all.
The conspiracy theorist seems to be the victim of a conspiracy by judges who are involuntarily doing him an immense service.
The French public must know this.
The scandal is that there is no scandal.