Ellis Cose

Opinion columnist

One thing that has long riled me about President Trump’s “fake news” Russian scandal is his insistence on the presumption of innocence. While “innocent until proven guilty” is a time-honored and revered American principle, Trump has rarely given that presumption to others.

After Donald Trump Jr. was caught red-handed cheering on a hostile foreign power, the president endorsed his son as a “wonderful young man.” In Trump’s view, soliciting help against America from Russian agents is a normal part of a 39-year-old’s growing up process. Wouldn’t any red-blooded American behave the same way? The answer is "no"; but that is beside this particular point, which is about Trump’s double standard.

This is the same Trump, after all, who was ready to lynch the so-called Central Park Five before their trial on charges of raping a jogger. (“They should be forced to suffer ... They must serve as examples,” he screamed in a full-page newspaper ad.)

And when DNA evidence and the real culprit’s confession exonerated them after roughly a decade behind bars, Trump demanded that the men be locked up again since he still believed them to be guilty. Long after their innocence had been irrefutably established, Trump grumbled, “These young men do not exactly have the pasts of angels.”

Trump and Sessions are backward on crime: Ellis Cose

Donald Trump Jr. commits a crime against credibility

To Trump, the mere suggestion of a crime has always been enough to condemn and destroy, whether the alleged offender is Hillary Clinton (remember his “lock her up” crusade?) or innocent kids accused of crimes. Since 1989, some 350 people have been exonerated by DNA evidence — many of them sentenced to die (and over 10% of whom pleaded guilty to crimes they did not commit). Still, Trump believes the benefit of the doubt is owed only to people like himself.

I don’t expect Junior’s troubles to change that, or to remind Trump that poor black and brown boys are as likely to be “wonderful young men” as is someone carrying his pedigree. But despite Trump’s own insistent obtuseness, it is worth taking this occasion to note that the presumption he insists on for himself and his son is also owed those without money and fame — those whom Trump would just as soon lock away forever, preferably without a trial.

Indeed, one of Attorney General Jeff Sessions' first official acts as part of the Trump administration was to order federal prosecutors to charge defendants with the maximum possible crime and to seek the maximum possible penalty. Since more than 90% of federal cases are resolved with a plea of guilty, a hyper-aggressive charging policy inevitably means a rise in prison time — including for those defendants whose biggest failing is lacking resources to properly defend themselves.

Even some conservative observers of the justice system were critical of Sessions’ policy. Freedom Partners, a non-profit backed by the ultra-conservative Koch brothers, issued a statement calling for “a different approach,” arguing that cops and communities alike were safer “when the punishment fits the crime."

Of course, Trump’s harsh and unthinking approach was no surprise; it was totally consistent with the vision offered in his inaugural address, during which he painted a frightening portrait of “American carnage” from which he would deliver us.

POLICING THE USA: A look at race, justice, media

The decline and fall of Jared and Don Jr.: Nepotism often ends badly.

The supreme irony is that this president, who expects people to put such stock in his words and to offer him the benefit of the doubt at every turn, is probably the least credible major political figure ever in a storied American pantheon that includes the likes of William "Boss" Tweed, Spiro Agnew and Joseph McCarthy. How unreliable is he? Between his inauguration and July 1, The Washington Post counted 744 “false and misleading claims” by Trump. The New York Times recently devoted an entire page to cataloging his lies. The authors observed, “There is simply no precedent for an American president to spend so much time telling untruths.”

In a New York Daily News article railing against New York City’s settlement with the Central Park Five, Trump portrayed New Yorkers as suckers: “The recipients must be laughing out loud at the stupidity of the city.” Why bother with such quaint things as fairness, evidence and innocence when we know in our hearts they are guilty — of something?

Part of me would give just about anything to see that same standard applied to Trump and his family. Why bother with a special counsel, with an investigation, with processes that will cost innocent taxpayers millions when we know in our hearts they are guilty — of something? Why not just lock the crooks away? The answer, of course, is that unlike Trump, most Americans actually believe that fairness and the presumption of innocence count for something and believe that there is value in giving possibly innocent people the benefit of the doubt.

Luckily for Trump, in other words, most Americans don’t think like he does.

Ellis Cose, senior fellow at the American Civil Liberties Union and author of The End of Anger and other books, is a member of USA Today’s board of contributors. Follow him on Twitter @EllisCose.

You can read diverse opinions from our Board of Contributors and other writers on the Opinion front page, on Twitter @USATOpinion and in our daily Opinion newsletter. To submit a letter, comment or column, check our submission guidelines.