How should we think about the criminal case against Donald Trump?

By now, with controversy buzzing for the past week about Trump’s indictment and arraignment, firsts for any former president, the details of the case are familiar: in the process of paying hush money to porn star Stormy Daniels, with whom he’d had an affair, Trump’s company processed his checks to his lawyer to make the payoff as mere “legal expenses.” This falsification of business records is central to the charges he’s now facing. Normally a misdemeanor, in this case Trump is being charged with a felony, on the basis that he had allegedly committed this crime for the purpose of carrying out a second one.

For the past week, the indictment — as well as several other cases that could lead to possible indictments against the former president — has triggered consternation and questions: Is the legal basis of the case sound? Is this case, of all possible cases, really the one to lead with in prosecuting a former president? Should any of this even be happening at all? Or will it actually empower the president, galvanize unrest, and set a dangerous precedent that will be used by Republicans against future political opponents?