A failed case will be presented as definitive proof of a witch hunt.
In January 1998, the American news cycle exploded with revelations about President Bill Clinton’s scandalous affair with Monica Lewinsky, a White House intern. Clinton, caught in the lie, looked straight into a camera and famously denied having sexual relations with Lewinsky, despite a year-long affair that began in 1995. By October of that year, special counsel Kenneth Starr had gathered enough evidence to present to the House of Representatives, charging Clinton with perjury and abuse of power—grounds for impeachment.
While presidential infidelity was not new to American politics—think of figures like John F. Kennedy and Franklin Roosevelt—the reaction to Clinton’s affair was highly political. The Republican-controlled House didn’t care about Clinton’s personal life. What mattered was that they could pin a crime on him, even if it was about lying under oath on an issue many of them had also been guilty of. Meanwhile, Democrats loudly defended Clinton, arguing that his sex life should never have been subject to such scrutiny in the first place.
This scenario is relevant today as former President Donald Trump faces legal troubles. The risks of prosecuting him, particularly in an environment deeply divided along partisan lines, are significant. If the case fails, the backlash could be severe. Trump’s supporters, already convinced of a political witch hunt, will be further emboldened by any legal missteps. A failed prosecution would only strengthen his narrative that he is a victim of a biased system, reinforcing his claims that the justice system is stacked against him for political reasons.
Just as with Clinton’s impeachment, the underlying motivations for prosecuting Trump may not have as much to do with the specific charges as they do with political maneuvering. For Trump, a failed case could serve as further validation of his grievance politics, turning the prosecution itself into a tool for rallying his base and undermining faith in the judicial system.
In both cases, the focus on personal misdeeds distracts from broader issues and risks making justice a tool of political warfare. Whether or not the case against Trump succeeds, its political ramifications could stretch far beyond the courtroom. The failure to secure a conviction would risk exacerbating the very divisions it sought to address.
Much like the Clinton affair, prosecuting Trump risks becoming a political spectacle with consequences that reach beyond the legal realm, potentially deepening the partisan divide in the country. The approach taken here will matter greatly, not just for Trump’s future but for the integrity of the justice system itself.
