Former President Donald Trump sits in the courtroom at New York Supreme Court, Oct. 2, 2023. PHOTO COURTESY OF COURTHOUSENEWS.COM

It has begun. What the Founding Fathers of these United States of America crafted through months of arguments and discussion in the 17th century, the laborious and agonizing conversations, and debates regarding the colonies’ tedious relationship with the Crown. The want of independence, forging a new prospective way of governing, one where a monarchy is nonexistent, and oversight is passed from one elected official to the next. The people or citizens would have a say in how they wanted to be governed. A government formulated for the people, by the people. A democracy.

As we know, this democracy was not perfect. Its intent was for the wealthy white male landowners to have the majority say in how policy was passed that affected the people the Constitution covers. White women, poor American whites, Indigenous Peoples of the Americas, indentured servants, and of course, the enslaved had no say in how the Constitution was applied, because it was not applicable to them.

As time progressed, as history moved forward, each of those groups would find the cover of the Constitution worth fighting for. This is what makes America a country that the world believes to be, or at least used to believe, was great. A Constitution, a collection of laws that protect the freedoms of the peoples chosen to be bound by them. It is no stretch of the imagination to say that this 236-year-old piece of paper that sits in the National Archives Museum in the Rotunda for the Charters of Freedom in Washington, D.C. is under attack by one of the very persons who swore to protect it. That individual has made history by being the first president to have been indicted and placed on trial in a court of law by his … peers, the citizens of the state of New York.

Donald J. Trump, who his attorney Todd Blanche referred to as “President Trump” – in a very smirk fashion that once again slides a fast one to the homebase of the “big lie” fantasy that the 2020 election was stolen – wants the jury to believe that he did nothing wrong. It was alright to pay hush money to keep people silent if it meant protecting “his family, his reputation and his brand.” Influencing a presidential campaign is “called democracy,” Blanche told the jury, and influencing a campaign is what is done, it is not a crime.

When we investigate the meaning or definition of the word influence, it is defined as “the power or capacity of causing an effect in indirect and intangible ways, one that exerts influence.” Another poignant definition is “corrupt interference with authority for personal gain.” The definition that Blanche would like the jury to surmise, is that “influence” or “influencing” means in the terms of modern-day influencing or “influencer.”

Social media influencers are paid by companies to use their platforms to post ads to their hundreds if not millions of followers or subscribers. This “influence” could be subtle, or it could out front, straight ads. Social media influencers can start trends that equate to a financial windfall for themselves and the companies that pay them. Being an influencer can be a very lucrative enterprise and many enter the realm of social media such as Facebook, Tik Tok, YouTube, and Instagram hoping to become such an influencer.

This definition of “influencer” that Blanche stated to the jury is not the definition to which the state of New York is referring. The prosecution is referring to “manipulation” and “corrupt interference for personal gain.” In this instance the first former president of the United States, being accountable in a court of

law, is indeed the “influencer,” no matter how loudly he proclaims that he had nothing to do with the hush money, or “influencer” payments that emptied into the accounts of Stormy Daniels and a former Playboy playmate. Trump would like jurors to believe that even if monies were indirectly issued with his authority and stamp of approval, three was nothing wrong with that fact if it was meant to protect his reputation, his businesses and his family.

But this week, David Pecker, former publisher of The National Enquirer tabloid magazine, may shed a little light on how the word “influence” and “influencer” worked to the advantage of Trump. As all of this plays out, the U.S. Supreme Court will still be deciding whether those who are elected to the Oval Office should be granted total immunity. Trump says, as he did on his Truth Social platform last weekend, that a “president has to be free to determine what is right for our country without undue pressure. A president must be free to make proper decision. His mind must be clear, and he must not be guided by the fear of retribution.”

If the Supreme Court ponders this questions and rules in Trump’s favor, then the Constitution in the National Archives would be worthless. We would no longer live in a democracy, a country where the people decide who sits in the White House, where the people vote on the laws and legislation that will affect their lives, where every citizen is liable for their actions regardless of their stature or political affiliations. Trump wants total immunity to shield himself from the crimes for which he has been indicted – notably the upcoming election interference trial the state of Georgia has pending against him headed up by District Attorney Fani Willis in Atlanta. Those allegations directly stem from his time in the Oval Office.

In the meantime, Trump sitting in a New York courtroom, forced to remain silent and listen to prosecution witnesses testify against him, will be worth the extra butter on the large box of popcorn. Especially if Stormy Daniels and Michael Cohen take the stand. Make that a nice, tall glass of wine.