Darryl Betts
I am a businessman and father, with particular interests in the philosophy of science, philosophy of mind, epistemology, logic, and AI.
Each of the prosecutions and cases brought against Donald Trump has serious problems – many believe that in a fair judicial system they would each be tossed out. But here I want to talk about what I believe is the strongest evidence that all those prosecutions were political – which is the fact that they all happened after Trump announced he was going to run for re-election.
A total of four criminal cases and two civil cases were brought against Trump in the lead up to the 2024 election. The fact that some preparation work on some of these might have started prior to his announcement, is irrelevant – because they clearly were all made official after his announcement.
This number of cases gives the strong appearance of political interference in Trump’s candidacy. But critical thinking demands that we ask two questions about the cases faced by Trump during his candidacy:
- How does this compare to all other past presidents or presidential candidates during their presidential candidacies? In other words, are all presidential candidates typically subject to prosecutions at this level?
- How does this compare to cases brought against Trump in the past? In other words, is Trump someone who is typically subject to prosecutions at this level?
To put this another way – if you want to counter the claim that the prosecutions against Trump suggest political motivation – you would need to show that either (a) the level of prosecutions brought against Trump wasn’t significant greater than for all other past presidential candidates, or that (b) the level of prosecutions brought against Trump in 2024 wasn’t significant greater than previously in his life.
To answer these questions, I consulted with two AIs – Microsoft “Copilot” and “Grok” on Twitter/X. My thinking in choosing these two AIs is that if there is bias in one of them then we should be able to detect that.
I was a little surprised to find that the two AIs strongly agreed with each other on all the questions I asked.
With regard to question one (past presidential candidates), Grok said the following:
“The legal scrutiny faced by Donald Trump in the lead-up to the 2024 election stands out as unprecedented when compared to previous presidential candidates.” “No other major presidential candidate in US history has faced such an extensive array of criminal charges during their campaign. Typically, candidates might have faced legal issues, but these were either resolved before their candidacy or did not involve criminal prosecutions during the election cycle.”
The Microsoft AI agreed with this.
With regard to question two (past cases in Trump’s life), Grok said the following:
“The legal scrutiny and the outcomes of these cases, both criminal and civil, represent a dramatic escalation in legal challenges faced by Trump compared to any previous period in his life.”
Microsoft Copilot agreed, and added the following:
“While Trump has faced numerous legal battles over the years, the intensity and nature of the criminal and civil cases during this period are unprecedented.”
I decided to dig a bit deeper in relation to civil cases, because I am sure Trump has faced some civil cases in the past. I really wanted to know whether the civil cases against him in 2024 also appeared political. I asked Grok:
“Do the civil cases brought against Trump during his 2024 candidacy differ significantly from the civil cases brought against Trump personally during other times of his life?”
Grok gave me an analysis in terms of scale and nature of cases, connection to political activity, and timing and context, which it then summarized as follows:
“In summary, while Donald Trump has faced numerous civil cases over his lifetime, those during his 2024 candidacy were distinct due to their high financial stakes, direct connection to his political activities, the elevated media attention they received, and their timing within an election cycle, all of which amplified their significance both legally and politically.”
I asked one final question of each AI:
“Do you think it is reasonable to infer from all of this that the cases against Trump during his 2024 candidacy were politically motivated?”
Grok said this:
“From a statistical and contextual standpoint, one could argue that there’s a reasonable basis to infer political motivation due to the timing, the scale, and the nature of the legal actions taken against Trump in 2024, especially when compared to historical norms. However, this inference does not equate to legal or factual proof without explicit evidence of political orchestration or intent.”
Microsoft Copilot said this:
“The sheer number and nature of the cases brought against Trump during his 2024 candidacy are indeed unprecedented when compared to both past presidential candidates and Trump’s own legal history. However, whether this constitutes strong evidence of political motivation is a matter of interpretation and perspective.”
Both AIs agreed that the level of cases against Trump were statistical outliers but stopped short of viewing this as conclusive proof of political motivation. However, they did agree that an investigation into political motivation might be warranted.
Copilot: “Given the unprecedented number and nature of the cases against Trump during his 2024 candidacy, it’s reasonable to consider an investigation into potential political motivations. The statistical outlier status of these cases compared to historical norms and Trump’s own legal history certainly raises questions that could merit further examination.”
Grok: “In conclusion, from a statistical standpoint, the unusual pattern in Trump’s legal challenges during his 2024 campaign might reasonably prompt an investigation. However, this would need to be balanced with a rigorous examination of the legal merits of each case to ensure any conclusions drawn are fair and based on factual evidence, not just on timing or volume of cases.”
I tried one final time to get AI to get off the fence on the question of political motivation.
“I understand the points you have made, but shouldn’t such a stark statistical outlier carry significant weight? If we apply the principle of inference to the best explanation, what in this case would be a better explanation than political motivation?”
Grok: “Applying the principle of inference to the best explanation indeed suggests that the statistical outlier in the number and nature of legal cases against Donald Trump during his 2024 presidential candidacy could be indicative of political motivation.”
Copilot: “While political motivation is one possible explanation, other factors could also be at play. For example, the nature of the charges and the evidence presented might have led to the legal actions, regardless of political context. Additionally, the high-profile nature of Trump’s candidacy and presidency could have attracted more scrutiny and legal challenges.”
Personally, I found the alternative explanations offered by Copilot quite vague and unconvincing, but you may have a different view.
One thing I found interesting is that the tone of the answers I got from the AIs shifted as I moved from questions about past cases, to the question of political motivation. This isn’t surprising, given that for the statistical questions the AI will be drawing more from uncontroversial historical records and therefore is able to give reasonably definite answers. In contrast when it comes to the question of political motivation, the AI reflects the heated and very polarized public discourse on the topic and only reflects relevant facts in so far as they have come to light.
I have focused here on the statistical aspect of the cases brought against Trump. But we cannot overlook the other indications of political motivation behind these cases – for example various politicians and prosecutors who have run on a platform of ‘getting’ Trump or who have publicly stated that Trump should be ‘locked up’, the movements of key government staff involved in the prosecutions, and the novel or highly contentious legal theories involved in the cases. I am not attempting to litigate this here – just saying that there are other reasons besides statistics to believe the cases against Trump were politically motivated.
This is an extremely serious matter. There is a strong appearance here that the Biden/Harris administration was behind these cases against Trump, in order to prevent him from being elected. If true, this makes the Biden/Harris administration guilty of extremely serious wrongdoing against both Donald Trump and the American people.
This article was originally published on the author’s blog.
