Donald Trump heads for real-world reckoning

The bravado behind Donald Trump’ s boastful hypothesis in 2016 – “I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose any voters” – is heading for a real-world reckoning.

Until now, at least, he has been uncannily right.

Through his two impeachments, his desperate agitations to stay in power after losing the last election and the far-ranging series of criminal charges against him from Florida to Georgia to Washington to New York, Mr Trump has held sway with his acolytes and the bulk of the Republican Party.

But now he is the first president in history to carry the stain of felony conviction. Will it matter in the November election?

After the damning verdict, everyone seemed to rush for the partisan ramparts.

But this is untravelled territory for Americans, this finding of criminal behaviour signed, sealed and delivered by unanimous jurors against the only man who has been the subject both of a presidential portrait and a mug shot.

Even some firm anti-Trumpers are not counting on the convictions making a difference.

“Get ready for a felonious president,” said Joan Marks (58), a Democrat who offered her glum prediction of a Trump victory while standing outside Manuel’s Tavern, a popular liberal hangout near Jimmy Carter’s presidential library in Atlanta.

Contributions flowed in to the Trump campaign, more than $1 million for each for the 34 convictions, his people said.

The case will go down in history as “The People of the State of New York vs Donald J. Trump”.

But after the verdict, just as before it, leading Republicans and a variety of likeminded voters wrote it off as just another egregious example of Us vs Them.

“Political persecution at the highest level,” said West Virginia attorney general Patrick Morrisey, the Republican nominee for governor.

Republican chair in South Carolina, Illinois and New York each criticised “banana republic” justice.

There was plenty of talk from other high places in the party about a “sham” trial, “rigged verdict”, “kangaroo court”, and Soviet-style shenanigans, as if apparatchiks had delivered the 34 convictions, not a jury whose 12 members were selected by the defence as well as the prosecution.

Even Moscow weighed in, on Mr Trump’s side.

“As regards Trump, it’s quite obvious that the effective removal of political opponents by all lawful and unlawful means is going on and the entire world can see it with a naked eye,” said Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov.

Mr Trump’s early reaction to the verdict suggested he will wear his conviction like a crown, and there were already signs of retribution against any Republican who dared to stand up for the trial.

Shortly before the verdict, Larry Hogan, the anti-Trump Republican senate candidate in Maryland and a former governor, posted an appeal for all Americans to accept the jury’s decision, whatever the outcome, and added: “At this dangerously divided moment in our history, all leaders, regardless of party, must not pour fuel on the fire with more toxic partisanship.”

Chris LaCivita, a senior Trump campaign adviser, told him on X, formerly Twitter: “You just ended your campaign.”

Among voters, Justin Gonzalez (21), a student and tutor in the border city of McAllen, Texas, said he did learn something quite troubling about Mr Trump in the trial.

“He’s a lot of things, but I never personally thought of him as a liar,” he said. “I guess this would change my perception of him.”

Yet as he prepares to vote in his first presidential election, Mr Gonzales cares more about immigration enforcement than the business of the cover-up of payments to silence a porn actress.

“Out of all the other issues, this is still bad, but it’s not enough to sway me to vote for Biden,” he said.

An ABC-Ipsos poll conducted in late April found that 80 per cent of Mr Trump’s supporters said they would stick with him even if he were convicted of a felony in the hush-money case.

Only 4% said they would withdraw their vote, though 16 per cent said they would reconsider it. In an election that is expected to be close, even small shifts in support could make a difference.

In the Lower Manhattan court, the first president to come to power propelled by tabloid fame and reality TV faced the ultimate tabloid kind of charges and yet, in a story of our time, he is the Republicans’ presumptive nominee for president.

With his ever-present sense of spectacle, though there was no televising of the proceedings, Mr Trump turned the trial into a campaign stage for re-election as best he could.

He has succeeded in other contexts by the use of his bullhorn – shouting down his opponents, savaging them on social media, calling them humiliating nicknames – but this time some of his normal moves were not available to him.

He did not have control of the situation. He could not simply hector away the constraints of a courtroom and the clear language of the law.

He tried on occasion and the judge ordered him to be silent, slapped him with fines and the threat of worse.

Mostly he glowered and, at times, looked sleepy.

New Yorkers were not used to seeing this happen to Mr Trump. Love him or hate him they have long considered him an escape artist through career-spanning thickets of legal, business and political thorns.

This time he did not get away.

“Finally, some accountability,” said Nadine Striker, who celebrated the verdict at a public pond across the street from the court, a mile from Fifth Avenue.

She held up a big banner reading “Trump convicted” and wore a headband propping up a hand-sized cut-out of Alvin Bragg, the prosecutor.

In November 1973, Richard Nixon famously declared to a meeting of newspaper managing editors in The Associated Press co-operative: “I am not a crook.”

At the time, in the Watergate scandal that ultimately consumed his presidency, it looked as though he might be just that.