Has the ‘Spirit of Runnymede’ ended?

By Deacon Mike Manno

(The Wanderer) – In the summer of 1215 English barons, tired of being ruled by a tyrannical king and subject to the indignities he fostered onto them, forced him to agree to their demands or face a civil war.

          King John, acceding to their demands, met the barons at a meadow alongside the River Thames about 20 miles west of London, a place called Runnymede, where the king capitulated and signed the document that provided a foundation for individual rights in both England and the United States, the Magna Carta.

          Among other things, the Magna Carta provided for trial by juries; no longer could someone be imprisoned or “convicted” of wrong doing by a decree from the king. Fairness and due process were required.       It also made the king subject to the laws of the realm.

          Of course the Magna Carta that was signed June 15 that year did not provide for all the rights and freedoms we now have. But it was the start of the march for liberty that continues to this day.

          As a lawyer and history buff, this was particularly interesting to me, especially in tracing the development of legal principles from 1215 and how the American and British systems developed in similar yet not identical forms. But there is little doubt that the two systems, arguably provide the greatest protection for individual liberties in the world.

          And they have their grounding in that singular event and the spirit of liberty which it enkindled in us; the idea for which we have lived, honored, and for too often died. I actually think it might mean more for Americans than the Brits. After all, they have their monarchy which unites them, we only have the law, for between these shores there is no king, potentate, or hereditary ruler. There is the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the Rule of Law.

          Well, maybe. Of late that rule of law seems to be wearing thin. I give you as Exhibit A one Donald J. Trump, forty-fifth president of the United States. Elected in a free election, defeated in a questionable one, and now subject to what can only be described as an extra-legal vendetta to keep him from reclaiming the office he once held.

          If King John was tyrannical, tell me what this is.

          Mr. Trump has had his problems with the law, he was a business tycoon, a rich billionaire and much of his former legal problems come with the territory as well as his personality and high self-esteem. But what is happening to him is not normal.

          He has been charged in four jurisdictions with a list of felonies – many of questionable legality – which would choke a horse. There are local charges against him in New York City and Atlanta, Georgia. There are federal charges against him in Washington, D.C. and Miami, Florida.

          Now there are some suspicious things about these cases. If you plot all the legal theories on a grid you would find that they have a commonality about them, not the least of which is the fact that they only become legal when the facts and the law are stretched to the breaking point where they no longer resemble the claimed legal theory.

          For example, take the New York cases. One has to do with the valuation of his business properties. I once was a real estate lawyer. When you borrow money using real estate as collateral there are two evaluations of it made, one by the owner (seller, or buyer) the other by the lender. Since the lender has the money it will assure itself that the property value is sufficient to protect its interest. Simple, right?

          But not in Mr. Trump’s case. In New York the state attorney general charged, and a local judge agreed, that Mr. Trump overvalued his properties in order to obtain loans. That ignores the fact that each lender made its own evaluation of the properties, came to its own conclusions, and decided the value protected the mortgage. They even testified in court to that. And, all were paid back in full.

          The result: a verdict against Mr. Trump for $450 million! Much the same could be said about the Stormy Daniels “hush money” charges. According to the District Attorney Alvin Bragg, what could be a misdemeanor is now a felony because it hid facts from the voters, thus election fraud. Hunter’s laptop you might ask?

          And if there was such an agreement, remember two things: one, these confidential agreements are a normal business practice; two the party “hushed” had agreed to a cash payment not to disclose certain facts. It’s legal unless the concealed matter was an illegality. Bragg is doing his best to make it so, but it is not.

          Another commonality here is that, except for Florida, all the venues are in deep blue jurisdictions where there is a political animas against Republicans in general and Trump in particular. The only reason why one case was brought in Florida is that is where Mar-a-Lago was raided, thus while the DOJ wanted the charges in D. C. the raid provided jurisdiction otherwise.

          Another common feature, all the prosecutors have an animas against Mr. Trump. Three of them who ran for their office campaigned on a platform to “Get Trump.”

          And finally, not that I couldn’t go on further, there is a connection in all the cases by a former DOJ attorney by the name of Matthew Colangelo. Mr. Colangelo was an official in the Obama Administration, moved to the New York attorney general’s office where he helped with cases involving Trump Charities, then to the DOJ where he was the 3^rd ranking official, then to the Manhattan district attorney’s office where he is now assisting Alvin Bragg in his case against Mr. Trump.

          And the Georgia prosecutors both made trips to D. C. while preparing their case.

          Sound like a collusion? Each local case has had some DOJ assistance. And each case, which could have been filed years ago, was filed in such a manner to come to trial during the height of the 2024 presidential campaign in which Mr. Trump was the expected GOP nominee.

          Put this all together and there is a gross appearance of a political prosecution, something the barons at Runnymede tried to prevent. And it has all been orchestrated by and through a DOJ under the control of King Joe. But similar charges against this King were dropped.

          And from much of the media, silence. Prosecutors are charged with prosecuting crime, but as Stalin once said, “Show me the man and I’ll show you the crime.” That’s not the way Runnymede thought it should work.

          So, is the spirit dying?

+++

(You can reach Mike at: DeaconMike@q.com and listen to him every weekend on Faith On Trial or podcast at https://iowacatholicradio.com/faith-on-trial/)