Will Democrats take an honest look at why the case against George Norcross imploded?

Democrats have good reason to be terrified President Donald Trump will twist the law out of shape to attack his enemies and help his friends. Already, principled prosecutors are resigning in protest, and Trump is only getting started.

But what if a Democratic prosecutor is guided by the same low motives? Will Democrats protest that, as well?

That’s the question raised by the smashing victory of George E. Norcross III, the indicted South Jersey political boss who was just cleared of criminal wrongdoing, spending what he estimates was $5 million on his defense, not to mention the countless hours of preparation and a massive dose of stress since he was indicted last June.

Norcross and his team charge that Attorney General Matthew J. Platkin is the Trump of this story, abusing his office to promote his political career by trying to burn Norcross at the stake.

Norcross is a conservative Democrat who made common cause with former Gov. Chris Christie and has never been forgiven by the progressive wing of the party, where Platkin lives. He’s ruled over his fiefdom in South Jersey with an iron fist for more than two decades, flipping the south from red to blue in 2001, and securing a Democratic majority in the Legislature that’s lasted a generation.

Still, he’s despised not just by progressives, but by many Democrats outside his region who resent his bullying and arrogance, and say his political power has enabled him to enrich himself and his friends. So, yes, if Platkin were the man to finally dethrone Norcross, that could be a giant political score.

“He thinks progressives will hoist him on his shoulders and bring him to public office somewhere, and he’s dreaming,” Norcross told me in a phone interview after the dismissal.

Platkin is appealing the loss. He denies any political motive, though he won’t rule out a run for office.

“This is not about political ambition,” he told me. “Sometimes people do things because they feel it’s the right thing to do.”

We can’t peer into Platkin’s heart to know for sure. But the deeper you look into this case, the more suspicious it looks. Platkin didn’t just lose; he got spanked. His prosecution was so far out of line that the judge dismissed the indictment before a jury could even consider it. That’s rare, as even Platkin concedes.

Even if you assume every fact presented in the indictment is true, Judge Peter Warshaw ruled, Platkin would still lose because nothing the indictment describes amounts to a crime. What Platkin called extortion, the judge found, was just tough bargaining between two hard-nosed businessmen. And even if a crime took place, the judge ruled, it all happened so long ago that the statute of limitations has run out.

Platkin didn’t just lose; he got spanked.

In other words, this was not even close. Federal prosecutors in Pennsylvania and New Jersey had investigated Norcross during this same period and never filed charges. It seems they agreed with the judge that no crime took place.

If Trump’s prosecutors filed a flawed case like this against a political enemy, Democrats would squeal like stuck pigs. But so far, we’ve heard almost none of that. Former Senate President Steve Sweeney, a Norcross ally who is running for governor, described the indictment as a “political prosecution,” and Republican leaders called for Platkin’s impeachment, citing this case and a few other high-profile, failed prosecutions by Platkin’s corruption unit.

But most Democrats were silent, or supportive.

Sen. Andy Kim, a hero to progressives after bringing down the machine candidate, first lady Tammy Murphy, in last year’s Senate primary, said Platkin was “trying to change our broken politics” and “taking on the hard fights that many shy away from.” And one leading progressive, Antoinette Miles of the Working Families Party, slammed the judge for dismissing the case, decrying it as a “mockery of the justice system.”

Trump makes no secret of his political designs. When his team lifted charges against New York Mayor Eric Adams, they explicitly said the decision was political, based on Adams’ willingness to help Trump on immigration enforcement, and that it was not about the merits of the case against him.

Prosecutorial misconduct is usually more subtle. But it’s always intolerable, from the left or right.

Tom Moran is a columnist for Advance Media and former editorial page editor at the Star-Ledger in Newark.