Trump’s act has worn thin Simon Rosenberg is right: All that is sinking in with the voting public, and will as the year progresses. Trump has a political history he did not have in 2016 or 2020. Greg Sargent considers it a sign how crazed Rep. Elise Stefanik’s (R-N.Y.) deflection is over a jury of Trump’s peers finding that he sexually assaulted E. Jean Carroll. The truth may not set MAGA cultists free, but it is injecting doubt (New Republic): What’s changed now is that Trump’s legal challenges are unfolding in courtrooms—in public-facing venues—before juries of the ex-president’s peers. It’s becoming impossible to fabricate conspiracy theories around the ordinary Americans whose judgment Trump faces, and the gravity of the proceedings is suddenly getting a lot more real. Like a battered boxer, Trump is cut over the eye. So work the eye, Democrats, Sargent insists. But with Trump now being prosecuted for numerous crimes, both the details of these charges and the role of ordinary Americans in serving up grand jury indictments constitute new fact sets of a much more serious nature. These involves concrete, vividly detailed efforts to seize power illegally and steal national security secrets, as well as a jury’s conclusion that Trump committed sexual assault, which is more compelling than his bragging ever was. […] The struggle of Stefanik and other Republicans to address Trump’s legal problems illustrates another rationale for Democrats pressing the issue: It could put GOP downballot candidates on defense too. “Democrats would benefit from having…