The New York Times has done some extensive reporting on why the Manhattan District Attorney’s office has decided, at least for now, not to prosecute Donald Trump for committing fraudulent business practices, mainly through misrepresenting to value of his assets to banks and tax assessors.

My take is that there are really three reasons Trump is getting a pass. The first is that he’s an ex-president. Ironically, the fact that he’s a very prominent person is also the reason he was so aggressively investigated to begin with. But his status demands a very serious reason for prosecuting him because it will set a troubling precedent. We certainly don’t want ex-presidents to be routinely put in the crosshairs as if that’s just to be expected from our leaders.

The second reason Trump will probably not have to face these charges is that the law is very demanding. Prosecutors would have to prove that Trump not only broke the law but was very intentional about breaking the law. Ignorance is actually a defense here, and because he doesn’t use email or leave much of an electronic trace of his decision making, it’s very hard to prove his state of mind beyond a reasonable doubt. This is another example of how rich people can get away with things that land ordinary people in prison or facing steep fines.

The third, and probably fatal, reason that charges aren’t being brought is that the key witness would have been Michael Cohen, and he is a dishonorable scumbag who perjured himself before Congress. The old district attorney, Cy Vance Jr., seemed inclined to rely on Cohen but he was replaced in January with Alvin Bragg, and Bragg didn’t want to go after an ex-president on the say-so of Cohen.

There were strong divisions about whether the case was strong enough, and some people working the case thought it should be brought on principle even if it had a good prospect of resulting in an acquittal. And the case is technically still open, waiting for new evidence or better supporting witnesses.

I’m not in a position to say whether the case was likely to succeed, although I suspect it would have been very difficult. I can see how it might have been right to make the effort irrespective of the risks of failure, but I can sympathize with the opposing view. I am disappointed, however, that this avenue of justice seems to have closed.

On the other hand, Trump deserves to be charged with much more serious crimes than tax evasion and bank fraud. He needs to be charged with seditious conspiracy.