The Hindu Editorial Vocabulary– Mar 31, 2023; Day 421

Debatable indictment (A formal document written for a prosecuting attorney charging a person with some offence): On the Donald Trump case

Donald Trump’s indictment will politically polarise (the act of dividing something, especially something that contains different people or opinions, into two completely opposing groups) Americans further

In a dramatic, but not unexpected, turn of events, former U.S. President Donald Trump has been indicted by a grand jury in New York in the case of hush-money (money paid to someone to prevent them from disclosing embarrassing or discreditable information) paid to adult film actor Stormy Daniels in 2016, before the presidential election of that year. While the indictment, the first one ever against a former U.S. President, remains under seal and the specific charges and the extent of evidence remain unclear still, media reports and comments by Mr. Trump’s lawyers indicate that the charges could include the fact that Mr. Trump’s erstwhile (Belonging to some prior time) attorney Michael Cohen paid $1,30,000 to Ms. Daniels on the 45th President’s behalf, apparently to stop her from going public with the story of their consensual (and earlier) extramarital (Characterized by adultery) encounter. Mr. Trump is said to have reimbursed the amount to Mr. Cohen after he won the election, which was then passed off (Be accepted as something or somebody in a false character or identity) as legal expenses. In this regard the charge in the indictment is expected to be a falsification of business records, but that is only a misdemeanour (A crime less serious than a felony) offence in New York, not a felony (A serious crime (such as murder or arson)). To prosecute Mr. Trump for a felony, the onus (something that is one’s duty or responsibility) is on Manhattan District Attorney (DA) Alvin Bragg to not only link the falsified bookkeeping to Mr. Trump directly but also to show that the business records in question were falsified to cover up an entirely different crime. Speculation is rife (Most frequent or very common) that the crime that will be cited (to mention something or use somebody’s exact words as an example to support, or as proof of, what you are saying) for this charge will be a potential violation of campaign finance laws — yet, this is where the prosecution case appears less firm. Following Mr. Cohen’s claim that he had paid Ms. Daniels at Mr. Trump’s behest (An authoritative command or request), there was a question of whether Mr. Trump would be liable under federal campaign finance laws, which require monies received as campaign donations to be disclosed transparently and be subject to specified legal limits. However, a federal investigation into this matter was closed in 2019, which suggests that the weight of evidence here may not have been compelling at the time.

The broader question underlying the indictment is whether Democrats are scoring a self-goal. While more serious issues that could be potential charges against Mr. Trump are on the scanner of the Justice Department, including certain dealings of the Trump Organization, his role in inciting (Provoke or stir up) the January 6, 2021 insurrection (Organized opposition to authority; a conflict in which one faction tries to wrest control from another) and withholding classified information after demitting (Relinquish or resign an office, membership, authority, etc) office, the Manhattan DA’s reliance on the hush-money case could end up as blowback (Unintended negative consequences from some action or policy) for the Democrats, especially given the dangers that it will polarise Americans further and be seen as pure political partisanship. Mr. Trump will of course extract every ounce of political capital that he can from what he has described as “political persecution” and a “witch hunt”, and that too will likely not favour Democrats in the 2024 election.

Want to improve your vocabulary further? Download the Lists of Word-Meanings of Previous Months here.