Actually I may have initially mis-interpreted the author’s argument. She’s pointing out that “falsifying” the ledger to avoid impeachment, during his first term, is by definition a Presidential act. Falsifying the ledger to avoid impeachment is the only viable interpretation of one of the three crimes from which the jury was allowed to choose.
One of the other two other options was that the ledger entry was in furtherance of a tax violation (even though Trump’s tax liability increased by defining the payment as legal expenses rather hush money.
The third option jurors were given, was that the entry was made to hide a violation of Federal campaign finance laws.
I would argue that the jury instructions were so convoluted, that the jury can be assumed, beyond a reasonable doubt, to have not even understood what crimes President Trump was being charged with, let alone whether he was guilty of them.
.
I think with Trump, they pick their ruling and work backwards to justify it.
They are in DC and part of the Swamp and Trump is hated there.
They did the same with Obama to come out with a ruling favorable to him. And they love them some Joe Biden.
Well put. Jury instructions basically boiled down to: here’s the man, find the crime.