Trial of Donald Trump

By Eric G. Weiner

Prosecutor: “Mr. Trump, would you state your full name for the sake of the court?”

Trump: “Uh, that is President Trump if you don’t mind.”

Prosecutor: “I’m sorry, for the purposes of this court, and the factual record, you are no longer the President of the United States. So please state your full name.”

Trump: “I am still the President of the United States of America and I demand the respect I deserve as the President of the United States. Who are you anyway? Have you ever been President? You’re just a nobody.

Prosecutor: Well I may be a nobody, but I am a nobody presently prosecuting the ex-President of the United States and at least I haven’t been impeached, not once, but twice.”

Trump: “I was the victim of the most vicious witch hunt in the history of the United States.”

Prosecutor: “Is that so? Is it worse than the witch hunts in Salem where women were actually burnt for supposedly being witches?”

Trump: “Much worse, and everybody says so.”

Prosecutor: “Well, I don’t say so, so it can’t be ‘everybody’ now, can it?”

Trump: “You’re a nobody as I said, so you don’t count.”

Prosecutor: “So I assume that anybody who does not agree with what you just said is a ‘nobody’ as well?”

Trump: “That’s right, and everybody says so.”

Prosecutor: “Ok, we will leave it at that. Let's move on. You have stated publicly, and on the record, that you are a “very stable genius”. Is that correct?”

Trump: “Yes that is absolutely true, and everybody says so as well.”

Prosecutor: “So you still testify here in this court that this still remains true? That your capacities have not diminished since you first stated this?”

Trump: “Absolutely. In fact, I am more stable and even more of a genius than I used to be. And by the way, everybody knows that as a fact.”

Prosecutor: “O.K., so can we assume that as a “genius” you are in fact very smart — is that fair to say?”

Trump: “Of course.”

Prosecutor: “Now a very smart person would not knowingly think something that was not based on facts, or that didn’t have a lot of evidence behind it, is that fair to say?”

Trump: “Yes, that is fair to say.”

Prosecutor: “Thank you, Mr. Trump. So a smart person wouldn’t take something as true unless they had good evidence for it, am I correct here?”

Trump: “Yes”

Prosecutor: “So can you tell me what good evidence you had for thinking it a fact that the election “was stolen”?

Trump: “It is a well-known fact, and everyone knows it.”

Prosecutor: “Well not being the “genius” you claim to be, I for one do not know it, and would like to know the evidence behind your assertion.”

Trump: “Dead people voted, in fact, the number of votes exceeded the total populations of a number of states.”

Prosecutor: “Do you have any factual sources for this that we can check? All the available sources we can find show the opposite.” Your lawyers and legislators who took 60 cases to court to support your contention were unable to provide a single supportable proof of significant voter fraud — even in front of judges who you yourself appointed. So what evidence did you have to back your extraordinary claim that “the vote was stolen”?

Trump: “I’ll have my people get back to you on that”.

Prosecutor: “No, that won’t do. This question is about your statement and the evidence you used to justify stating it. Name one solid piece of evidence, if you can, supporting your contention.”

Trump: “I’ve already told you what everybody knows to be fact. Dead people voted, ballots were thrown out or destroyed, the voting machines were rigged, absentee ballots were faked and forged.” Everyone knows this.

Prosecutor: “Everyone does not include me I suppose, because I don’t “know” this”.

Trump: “That’s right, because as I said before, you are a nobody. I on the other hand am the President of the United States and I don’t need to prove anything to a nobody like you.”

Prosecutor: “Well if you can’t, or “don’t need” to prove anything” in this court then we can presume that you didn’t have, or are unwilling to substantiate your claim of a “stolen election”. This leaves one other possibility that perhaps you were not of sane mind when you made these statements.”

Trump: “I am the sanest person you ever met in your life”.

Prosecutor: “In that case, by your own admission, you cannot claim incompetence or mental illness as a defense. And because, as you claim, you are a smart person, and have just testified that a smart person would not believe anything without good evidence to support it, and by not providing this court one scintilla of evidence for your statements –we must conclude. one; either you are not a very intelligent person, or, second, that you are an irresponsible, dangerous liar, willing to undermine the very democracy of these United States and violate the rights of its people as expressed by their legitimate vote in order to remain in power. What do you say to that?”

Trump: “I don’t have to say anything to that. I am the President of the United States and I don’t have to say anything to anyone. And everyone knows that, Mr. nobody.”

Prosecutor: “I have no further questions at this moment.”