Published On: August 9th, 2023

Donald J. Trump has just been indicted for the crime of “willful blindness” in refusing to accept the fact that he lost the 2020 election to Joe Biden, therefore losing the defense that he lacked the mental intent required for criminal prosecution.  The idea put forth by the Department of Justice is that EVERYONE knew that the election was fairly held and that there was no fraud substantial enough to have changed the outcome.

Really?  Everyone knew it was free and fair?

The fact that the Supreme Court would not hear all the cases brought to its attention is not proof that there was no fraud, it is only a statement by the Court that hearing the cases would involve it entering areas it traditionally will not touch.  The reputation of the Supreme Court was somewhat injured by hearing the Gore vs Bush dispute regarding hanging chads and does not want to endure the criticism.  The following are traditional areas where the Supreme Court will not go:

  1. Questions that are not ripe, meaning legal questions that belong to have further litigation at a lower level before the Supreme Court makes a final interpretive decision.
  1. Questions that are moot, meaning legal questions that involve a situation that has already taken place and where no remedy is meaningful. An example would be a case where a woman wants to have an abortion in a jurisdiction in which the procedure has become illegal.  If the baby is born during the litigation process the legal question is moot.
  1. Questions that are hypothetical in nature. Cases before the Supreme Court must involve a real controversy with real actors.  The Court does not hear cases that involve what ifs? 
  1. Questions that involve the political process, also called political questions. After the 2000 Gore vs Bush case the Court does not want to get involved in issues belonging to the voting public.  What this means is that, having relinquished important oversight, voter fraud in Presidential elections is likely to increase.

Miss Constitution thinks there was both voter fraud during the actual voting process significant enough to effect the outcome of the election and also election interference prior to the Presidential election.  Each state handles the process of Presidential elections every four years.  It is important that this function remain with the states, as voter fraud in a few states is much less dangerous for the country than nationwide fraud that would absolutely occur should the process be administered by the federal government.

Miss Constitution, how do you know that a federally administered Presidential election process would be fraudulent?  Miss Constitution knows because Miss Constitution is neither stupid nor willfully blind.   

What Donald Trump might have said is that he is convinced that there was significant voter fraud in the 2020 election, that he is disappointed that the Supreme Court declined to hear cases that intended to prove it, that the process for remedying such fraud absent a Court ruling is Constitutionally unclear, that he thinks it important to uphold the will of the majority, and that his intention was to do everything legally available to him to see that the election did not disenfranchise legitimate voters.

That some of his advisors advised that he give up is irrelevant.  Their titles are irrelevant.  Their knowledge of the Constitution is irrelevant.  That he tried to correct (however unadvisedly) what he sincerely believed was a wrongful election result is relevant.  This is not the first time in American history that this sort of thing has happened, but it was papered over with less attention. Thomas Jefferson engaged in acknowledged (much later) dirty tricks against John Adams and won the election of 1800 by a vote of Congress.  Abigail Adams never forgave Jefferson for what he had done to her husband and their fiery exchange of letters is available for all to read.

Is there a legal defense for willful blindness?

Yes; the truth.

If the Department of Justice is going to indict Donald Trump on the novel legal theory that he did not sincerely believe he had won the Presidential election of 2020, or deliberately blinded himself to the absolute truth of a free and fair election of Joe Biden, then ALL the facts concerning the voting process in the swing states, early voting, duplicate voting, dead people voting, illegal voting, handling of voting machines, internet use, absentee voting, military voting, poll watching, etc are all available to him as a defense and must be revealed.  If election interference – the deliberate withholding of information that might have changed a person’s vote, or officials of the United States Government, whether retired or not, purposely misleading voters – is figured in, the legal question becomes:  “Is it possible that Donald Trump could have sincerely believed that the 2020 Presidential election was stolen?”  If the answer is that a reasonable person could come to that conclusion then there is no willful blindness, and hence no crime.

Miss Constitution thinks if the federal government is going down this path then the whole extended story should be revealed.  All evidence taken by the Congressional January 6th Committee should be revealed to the public.  All footage of the events of January 6, all testimony, all evidence, all statements, all requests for security and why they were denied, all emails between officials involved, all messaging between the Speaker of the House and the Mayor of Washington, DC, between the Speaker of the House and the military, between the President and the military, etc.  Let all the truth come before the public, state or federal. The public will then cast their vote in 2024 partly with this knowledge in mind.

Miss Constitution feels that We the People must take back the Republic.  Those we entrusted with it as public servants have betrayed our trust.  It is natural for human beings to wait until a great man or woman comes along – but that is not how our system works.  WE were given, by the Founders, the responsibility for preserving, protecting, and defending the Rule of Law in America.  We pledged, in the Declaration of Independence that if our government became corrupt we would “abolish it” and “institute new government” in harmony with Moral foundations and Individual Liberty.

Miss Constitution calls for all Republican candidates to disavow this latest indictment and to bond in unison with candidate Trump until the matter is litigated or dismissed.  Political regular order must be restored.  We the People must demand it be restored; those who oppose this restoration must be retired or shamed or both.  This is our duty to the Founders; to those who have died in service to this country; and to ourselves and to our posterity.  Americans can no longer go on in willful blindness.

Ask Miss C

Miss C is taking questions you have about the US Constitution. Simply submit your questions and she’ll reply to you with answers. Great questions may be featured in her blog as well as added to an FAQ page. 

    Share This Story, Choose Your Platform!

    About the Author: Miss C

    M.E. Boyd, "Miss Constitution" is an attorney, author, and instructor in Business, Educational, and Constitutional Law. She has appeared on television and radio and speaks publicly on American history, the founding documents, and current political issues. Her mission is to help citizens understand the Founding philosophies behind the system so that we can-together-help preserve the blessings of liberty and prosperity. Read more about Miss C