Gail Collins responds:
Well, if I wanted to make sure the reputation of Merrick Garland didn’t suffer, I’d prosecute rather than risk being remembered as the guy who wimped out. And as a matter of principle … well, gee.
Is "wimped out" something we're still allowed to say? Why not "I’d prosecute rather than risk being remembered as a pussy"? Where's the line these days? You're allowed to impugn a man's masculinity with... which words?* Or are we moving toward regarding all the once-gendered words as nonbinary?
Stephens inserts:
Collins goes on, conceding "there’s a danger to setting that kind of precedent." She sees the Trump of the Future the same way Stephens does: "You’re totally right about what Trump would try to do if he got himself re-elected in 2024."
Whether their prognosticating is right or wrong, it's good that there's restraint inspired by the fear of what will happen when the tables are turned.
And Stephens and Collins move on to talking about Trump as a 2024 candidate. Stephens sees fit to use abortion as a funny metaphor:
It hasn’t gone unnoticed in Trump’s inner circle of political advisers that there’s a quiet but palpable turning away from the 45th president among a lot of Republicans.... Of course, from everything I know about Trump, this will just be an incentive for him to abort the DeSantis candidacy in utero, so to speak, by announcing sooner rather than later that he means to run.
And with that indiscretion, I will close the door on the Bret-and-Gail confabulation.
______________________
* 10 years ago, I blogged about the word "wimp" in great detail, with lots of OED material. The context at the time was Mitt Romney, the presidential candidate. There was an effort to besmirch him as a wimp.
At one point, I exclaimed:
Fascinating! Stepping back, I can see softness and weakness associated with the left. It's the conservatives who think they are hard, strong, manly, and courageous, and this must make liberals want to get the accusation of wussiness/wimpiness going the other way.
Go to that link for more. And, yes, I do get to "wimp factor" (George H.W. Bush) and "mush from the wimp" (Jimmy Carter).
Posts
92 comments:
Joe and his son and brother are crooks who used Joe's name and VP status (under Obama) to stuff their pockets with millions and millions of intentional washed tax dollars.
Trump should not need to go after them. If we had justice in this nation - they would already be indicted, prosecuted, found justly guilty and serving time.
Speaking as a 39-year former career prosecutor, I can assure you that NOT filing charges is the more difficult and criticized path in 99% of criminal investigations. Usually the only individual happy about the decision is the defendant.
It's why ethics are such an important part of the job, or at least they used to be.
I still have not seen a legally serious essay on what crimes Trump allegedly committed on January 6 and the factual basis for a conviction. Inciting a riot? Joke.
What I really want to know is does Joe have a Bitcoin account. Does Hunter?
"If, God forbid, Trump runs and wins in 2024..."
These fuckers, along with the rest of the MSM, are praying Trump runs.
I would be very disappointed if there weren’t serious investigations into the DOJ, FBI, CIA, NSA, D congressional leadership ( here’s looking at you Mr. Nadler and Schiff and others),the Bidens and any media complicit in spreading knowingly false info in an attempt to influence the election illegally.
Trump has been prosecuted to an extreme degree and has come up clean. Let’s see how the prosecutors of Trump do when it is their turn in the docket. The only way to end criminal behavior is to prosecute and if found guilty, sentence.
I expect DeSantis to do this as well, not just Trump.
Wuss might be the right word here - it’s a combo of wimp and pussy.
To paraphrase the Big Orange himself, prosecuting people you've defeated in an election is "banana republic" stuff. What kind of low, despicable senator from Delaware, or whoever is actually in charge, would even think of such a thing? Prosecuting people you think might defeat you in a future election is a trick you would expect from communists or f... f... f... I forget.
Wimps: left or right? For a while it seemed to work to say if the left is anti-war or anti-Pentagon, they must be personally wimpy. They want to make the world safe for wimps like themselves. George McGovern, a true war hero, came in for this treatment. One counter is for the left to say conservatives are the emperor with no clothes: they're trying to compensate for their wimpiness by playing toy soldiers and causing actual deaths and injuries. Part of the strangeness of the Biden years (has it already been ten years?) is that war in Ukraine has such emotional support from the left, no dissent allowed, everything the Pentagon and the CIA say is gospel. The neo-con warmongers have joined the NeverTrumpers who talk about being a gentleman, and the woke, who aren't really known for that. Strange bedfellows. Biden keeps hoping he can be mistaken for JFK or FDR, and now I guess Bush Jr. "Mission Accomplished," as more and more of Ukraine falls to Russia, which is becoming more of a world power. Let's remake all the Rambo movies: "we'll go back, and this time we'll win." Let's make America ... no, no, forget it.
"If, God forbid, Trump runs and wins in 2024, the first thing he'll do is find any pretext to prosecute Joe Biden."
Pffft.
I'm sorry, but history suggests that Donald Trump would do no such thing. History suggests that Donald Trump is a pussy.
There is no reasonable doubt that Hillary Clinton committed gross violations of our national security laws in setting up a private email server to illegally evade the laws we have governing the public's access to our government's records; and then wontonly emailing Top Secret files and information hither and yon via unclassified computer networks (even emailing with known pedophile flashers such as Anthony Weiner to boot).
And Donald Trump promised during the campaign that if elected, he would put Hillary Clinton in jail. That is the singular reason why some people voted for him - to bring her kicking and screaming before the scales of Justice.
Then Trump didn't do it. What a giant pussy. All talk and no action.
If there are any Republican nominees for President out there who want an Attorney General who will do the right thing, please drop me a line. I'll absolutely put every one of these people behind bars for you. We might even have trials. Maybe. Or maybe we'll dispense with them at get them right out to Gitmo, on day one.
I didn't think of Carter's masculinity being questioned in the wimp comments, just his indecisiveness and ineffectiveness. Same thing with Bush I, the fighter pilot. I do remember a strange Andrew Kopkind article about Carter's election marking the dawning of the Age of Androgyny. Apparently one of Kopkind's older relatives saw Carter on TV and called him a "fegeleh."
There ought to be someway to indicate ineffectiveness or fecklessness that doesn't refer to effeminacy lack of masculinity, and something is indeed changing. Think of young women who tell men and other women to "grow a pair" or even tell other young women to "grow some ovaries." Balls either become unisex or are replaced by ovaries, at least in the movies.
I doubt the public is behind the desire to prosecute/persecute Trump. For most people, isn't it just nakedly political at this point? And what should Trump do if he takes office again? I thought it was good that he didn't go after Hillary, and wouldn't want him getting caught up in the tit-for-tat persecutions, but aren't there a lot of people out there who really deserve it this time?
Do these Journalists who twist and agonize and scheme like this ... do they understand and believe deep down that Biden is a crook ?
Or are they so loyal to team D- all D-crimes are a figment of the imagination?
Pussy-word shaming has no effect on a non-woke audience. They are not pussies.
"The first thing he'll do.... " projection from two more bores of Boresville. With just a smidge of fear on the justice front.
That the Justice dept never went after Hillary and her crimes stemming of her use of a Private Server while Secretary of State - is the biggest travesty of justice in the history of the US.
I doubt Trump’s AG is not stupid enough to prosecute senile Biden. But this is another reason to vote for DeSantis or Pompeo.
Seems to invent a scenario where Joe quits fucking up. Quite generous of them, but unlikely.
Trump won't have to go after his present enemies. By supporting the hard left they are running like lemmings toward a seacliff.
No, more likely, the first thing Trump would do is restore energy independence and rebuild the US Army and Navy. He'd restore the border. It'll matter to him that fentanyl and other opioids coming over the border killed 100,000 Americans last year. He'd find ways to end the supply chain crisis about which Chief Transportation Wimpo Buttigieg is whimpering that nothing can be done. He'd bring in school choice. He'd insist that schools keep parents informed about such matters as the presence of CRT curriculums, failing grades, truancy and gender changes. He'd want Congress to establish as law what is presently ping-ponging back and forth as executive orders.
Why would he most likely do these things first? Because he's a lot smarter than the Dems
The Dems, I suppose, would be calling for riots and Soros prosecutors would be releasing rioters back onto the streets and the Wapo would be snivelling on about how disagreeing with it means the end of democracy.
But maybe not. If there is famine in Africa this November because the climatistas would not let the power of fossil fuels fertilize, harvest and transport crops; if the northern states are facing winter deaths because the climatistas want us to use solar and wind power which only supply 2% of what we need to live through the winter; if there are heat deaths this summer because climatistas want the air conditioning off; if these very possible conditions exist and Trump is elected and the Dems try to riot prevent action by him ... then there will be surprises. But it won't be a surprise to see Trump work make America great again while the Dems try to burn it all down.
Very impressive, the very mature thinking of these NYT editorialists! The paradigm of a self-defined elite!
If they think there's a prosecution to be had, make the case for it.
Hint: it doesn't have anything to do with whether Attorney General Garland is a wimp, a weasel, or whatever. I has to do with the evidence, the elements of a crime, and the likelihood of getting a jury to convict. Everything else is just jaw-flapping, political onanism.
The Donald has a wide range of viable choices in the prosecution grab bag. Democrats swill be shamed no end for their poor judgement in electing Joe. Of course they have a plan...
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2022/06/29/u-s-health-officials-purchase-105-million-doses-pfizers-covid-19-vaccine/7773399001/
Remember, from the 1980s... "Don't send a wimpy bag to do a Hefty job"?
"HEFTY HEFTY HEFTY, WIMPY WIMPY WIMPY.
Prosecute for what? For beating Hillary in 2016. They are still pissed about that since they thought the fix was in for her to win that election. It was HER turn you know! That's why the had to double-down in 2020. They horribly miscalculated his support and had to make sure that never happened again.
I'm so old I remember when the left adored Donald Trump. He was invited to the best parties, given awards for his contributions to D.C., and people bragged about staying at his hotels. Plus, they were happy to take his money. What changed? He beat HRC and threatened the "gravy train" of both the left and right-wing politicians in D.C.
Reading a column by both Bret Stephens and Gail Collins. That's tough work. Thanks for taking one for the team.
IF...and I still see it as a giant 'IF' he runs and gets elected again, the first thing Trump will do is open up our energy production in ways that'll make some John Kerry's head spin. Then he'll (along with a GOP Congress) get funds to close up our border and he'll have his State Dept. work with Central and South American governments to figure out ways to keep 'em home.
Then he'll get back to work on China. Joe Biden? He'll be getting spoon fed soft foods by then. I don't think Trump would spend a minute on him.
In all the stories about Trump, I don’t remember his vengefulness side stand out.
Tit for tat does not an artful deal make. The sport of condemning Trump ought to have at least one rule. Condemn Trump on evidence.
Curious George had it right: These fuckers, along with the rest of the MSM, are praying Trump runs.
Trump is the best thing that ever happened to the NYT, the WaPo and the Democratic Party. Any honest person in one of these organizations would admit that its dearest hope is that Trump will keep bellowing for another 25 years.
I don't like either political team and last voted for a major-party presidential candidate in 2012. But I know a Keep Hate Alive effort when I see one.
I'm stuck wondering why we are concerned that Merrick Garland's reputation should not suffer.
If Trump is convicted and tried on nothing but what we heard so far, I may very well end up voting for him.
If, God forbid, Biden runs and wins in 2020, the first thing he’ll do is find any pretext to prosecute Trump, and then it’s off to the races.
Once again the democraticals (which includes the lefty NeverTrumpers by definition) seek to impeach and prosecute Trump for what the democraticals have done/are doing.
And all the democraticals know that any charge whatsoever brought against Trump in DC, no matter how big and obvious the lies underneath those made up charges, will result in a 98%-deeply partisan-democratical-DC Jury Pool conviction.
The first thing Trump (or any R POTUS) should do is demand a letter of resignation, to be called at any time for every political appointee. But many of these types have been given civil service positions and are layers deep in the bureaucracy. I'd make it clear there is a high paying position in North Dakota or elsewhere in the deepest red territories for those actively undermining the POTUS. Whole agencies in fact. If the R's rule the house and Senate, do it immediately.
Hey, Robert Byrd showed us that substantial parts of the FBI and others could operate out of West Virginia. The former political appointees will vanish into the swamp like a frog spotting a heron.
Then (via the new Speaker) form a select committee to investigate Schiff. Same rules Nancy used for the J6 committee. Others to follow. (Hell, if the R's take the House that can begin next January.
Locking up Joe Biden would be like locking up a tomato. A carrot. A stalk of celery.
They're going to indict Trump in order to provide cover for Blue states and counties to keep him off the ballot.
What if, God willing, a Republican takes office and actually does all the things the left said Trump did?
He would need help with prosecutions. It's his pardon power that would go into overdrive.
"I'm stuck wondering why we are concerned that Merrick Garland's reputation should not suffer."
Yeah, I thought that was a bit tough to parse: "Well, if I wanted to make sure the reputation of Merrick Garland didn’t suffer, I’d prosecute rather than risk being remembered as the guy who wimped out."
Who does "I" refer to? If it's the same "I" both times — " if I wanted" and "I'd prosecute" — then the "I" is Garland, and Collins is trying to picture what's in Garland's mind. She's projecting on him a desire to preserve his own reputation and imagining him thinking of his reputation as having to do with manly strength.
And if Garland was all about preserving his reputation, he'd also be responsible for taking the evidence before a court. He has to worry about how well that would go, and that's also what he has to think about if he is actually making an ethical decision about whether to prosecute.
Ironically, Collins herself does damage to Garland's reputation: She blithely assumes he makes decisions based on his personal interest in looking good and not like a wimp.
Oc·cam's ra·zor
[ˌäkəmz ˈrāzər]
NOUN
the principle (attributed to William of Occam) that in explaining a thing no more assumptions should be made than are necessary
Trump got 74 Million votes in 2020. What is the more likely explanation for those votes?
Trumps is a diabolical mastermind capable of making people believe anything and everything he says or 74 million people were happy with the financial and social security they felt they had in their lives while he was president?
In 2020, those who opposed Trump convinced 81 million people to vote for Biden instead. How many people are happy with their financial and social security under Biden currently?
If you have something on Trump, charge him. Between the Mueller Report and the J6 committee at least 60 million has been spent investigating him. If you haven't found enough to charge him yet, stop spending taxpayer money on it and start working on a viable alternative to him for the 2024 election.
My guess is that garland realizes that prosecuting Trump would be a disaster, and backfire on the left.
Mr Wibble: "They're going to indict Trump in order to provide cover for Blue states and counties to keep him off the ballot."
Correct.
Trial by press.
What if, God willing, a Republican takes office and actually does all the things the left said Trump did?
From candidate to President, he was mocked, slandered, prosecuted, and persecuted for not doing the things they accused. The logical conclusion is that to claim left-wing credentials, he must therefore do everything they alleged, and that they did.
Democracy dies in darkness. Demos-cracy is aborted at the twilight fringe.
Trump is already in negotiations with Stormy Daniels. The plan is for her to come in and take a leak all over Merrick Garland's desk. There a snag because she wants a considerable portion of the pay per view revenues and Trump wants to hold her to a flat fee. I'm betting that Trump wins this negotiation. After her experience with Avenatti, she's broke and needs a good payday, but we'll see what develops.
They said the same thing about Trump and Hillary.
The first thing Trump did after being inaugurated was to cut short any effort to prosecute her.
It's amusing how they assume Joe Biden will be alive even before the 2024 election. Democrats will have want to use his death to provoke a sympathy vote. But for who? Kamala is more unpopular and not really the "legacy-holder" for the Biden administration.
What Trump would and should do is fumigate the DOJ from top to bottom.
“Locking up Joe Biden would be like locking up a tomato. A carrot. A stalk of celery”
Germany just sent a 101 year old man to prison for being a guard at sachsenhausen. So it is not out of the question. Democrats want Trump to go to prison, for some unspecified crime, perhaps the felony of uncouth manner of speaking. Truly, democrats have found the man, and have been searching for the crime a long time.
"She blithely assumes he makes decisions based on his personal interest in looking good and not like a wimp."
Just the mindset we need on the Supreme Court. Given his unprincipled behavior as AG, I can't believe that anyone could have touted him as a moderate candidate for the court. Thank God that didn't come to pass.
Trump will prosecute Biden -- SO WE BETTER BEAT TRUMP TO IT AND PROSECUTE HIM FIRST. We don't want to, but since Trump will do it, we are obligated to do it to him.
This is the left mentality on so many destructive things.
No matter who runs on the GOP ticket in 2024, the same play-book will be used on him or her as was used on Trump. Remember how the democrats and media described Romney and McCain? Now, Romney is one of their pets and McCain is receiving an honor from Biden. People forget so quickly.
No matter who is the next GOP presidential nominee, every statement and action from the past going back to middle school will be reviewed and taken out of context. The racist accusations will start from day one. With Trump, once he was the nominee it was a concerted effort by the democrats, the media, and the Jeb wing of the GOPe. People say Trump is "divisive". He wasn't until the media portrayed him that way. They are doing the same right now with the candidates for this fall's mid-terms. They will do the same in 2024. And the right falls for it every single time.
Tom said...
Wuss might be the right word here - it’s a combo of wimp and pussy.
I first heard the term "wuss" in high school back in the 60s. I was told by users of the term that it meant "worse than useless." I rather prefer this derivation.
No worries, Trump would just make a terrible pick for AG like Sessions or Barr.
But if he put someone like Miller or Grenell in there, I'd be buying popcorn by the ton.
I'm not sure keeping Trump off the ballot would work - his name is easy to remember for write ins. I don't think the Republicans will be as stupid about controlling ballots as they were in 2020.
'These fuckers, along with the rest of the MSM, are praying Trump runs.'
The man sells papers.
From a business standpoint he is a godsend...
Game theory states that tit-for-tat will happen. If somehow Biden is still President when the GOP takes over Congress, impeachment articles will be filed in less than a month.
Trump was impeached for far less than Biden has done.
The Left believes that they will never be out of power, so they are willing to do ANYTHING to achieve their goals.
In poker terms, they go all in on every hand.
A "pretext" to prosecute Biden. Bwahahaha!
Garland may occur to these weasels as a wimp, but he is second only to Eric Holder in infamy. It takes some huevos to be as openly corrupt as those two.
Garland's treatment of 1/6 prisoners vs. Holder's corrupting of the DOJ is a close call.
They are mendacious idiots, desperately trying to spin this. The House in the next Congress will be Republican. The only question is their margin of victory. Even under the 2020 rules, where millions of Dem ballots were created out of thin air, they are going to lose, because their cheating only works in big cities with Dem machines (except maybe for Maricopa County, AZ - but state law there has been significantly tightened). Most of the critical Congressional borders have been set now, and the Dems lost more than they won, and esp in places, like NY, where they thought themselves guaranteed picking up needed seats lost to fast growing states. What that means is that the 1/6 perpetrators will be investigated by their Republican “colleagues”, the evidence being hidden by Pelosi will see the light of day, it will be crowd sourced, the deprivation of Constitutional rights of the 1/6 defendants will be seen as political persecution, and Garland’s reputation will be shredded. He may not have given the orders for the political prosecutions of these political protesters, but he was in charge. I expect continuing Congressional investigations of the DOJ throughout that next Congress. Of course, the FJB DOJ isn’t going to play ball, with Congress investigating them, but Congress does have weapons of their own…
Why hasn’t a special prosecutor been named to investigate Hunter and James Biden? We all know the answer to that - AG Garland is a spineless weasel. But it is likely that they wouldn’t have been prosecuted if Senile Joe had lost in 2020 (or if their voter fraud hadn’t survived judicial scrutiny, which it survived by the courts sticking their heads in the sand so as not to smell the stench). There is a non spoken agreement that we aren’t a Banana Republic, and that means that we don’t prosecute election losers. This is a big part of why Crooked Hillary, despite thousands of very obvious violations of the Espionage Act and Federal Records Acts, was never tried in court by the Trump Administration. Remember Harry Reid killing the Filibuster for Appeals and District Court nominations? The result was that the dam was broken, and Republicans now have a 6-3 majority in the Supreme Court. If the Dems indict Trump for even Jay walking that deal is now off. The Bidens will be first to be investigated, but not the last. Very quickly after that will be AG Garland and the 1/6 prosecutors, for, among other things as civil rights violations under cover of law. Probably a bit of perjury too as well as §1001 lying to federal officials.
Mr Wibble said...
They're going to indict Trump in order to provide cover for Blue states and counties to keep him off the ballot.
I also agree that this is the motive. The question is will it work? Is there a law that would enable this ? Even blue states might hesitate at this. Of course those are states he would lose anyway. Maybe we should see how many are still "blue" after this November.
Whether their prognosticating is right or wrong, it's good that there's restraint inspired by the fear of what will happen when the tables are turned.
Yes, it would be nice if Dems finally started to realize that everything they do to us, we will do to them.
But it's not just Trump getting in. IF Dems push this BS against Trump to the point of indicting, Joe and Hunter are going to trial no matter which GOP candidate wins in 2024
Less about preserving wimp Garland's rep and more about preventing Trump running.
Garland's frail bleat is really annoying.
By 2024 Biden will be completely gaga, and indicting him would be considered "piling on".
Not happenin'
What crime has president emeritus Trump committed?
What would he be charged with?
John LGBTQBNY Henry
Let me add a question - do they really want a real estate developer like Trump prosecuting them, or a cum Laude Harvard Law Grad, Navy JAG lawyer assigned to Seal Team One, Bronze Star recipient, and former Special Assistant US Attorney, like Ron DeSantis coming after them? That is very likely whom they will get if they an age to knock Trump out.
Anything to say "Trump". That's the T in NYT.
Like he immediately decided to prosecute Hilary Clinton? These people are so delusional. I wish Trump was the person that the people that hate him think he is.
Whoever the next Republican president is, Trump or someone else, they will benefit from what happened to Trump as president.
It's probably a bad idea to start prosecuting the prior administration, but it's an even worse idea to keep the bastards around and in control of the DOJ.
At least the top three layers in the DOJ must be presumed disloyal, and be replaced. There's nothing in the constitution or in tradition which says that the administration has to endure a disloyal DOJ.
"In 2020, those who opposed Trump convinced 81 million people to vote for Biden instead."
I am not aware of any evidence for that proposition. Some anecdotes, but no evidence.
Predetermining that if Joe Biden is prosecuted, it will be on a "pretext." This after two impeachments and a kangaroo J6 investigation. They assume the other side will do what they know for a fact their side would do, and they're getting their narrative out.
Think 2022... as in November of this year. If Republicans win both houses, which is quite possible, expect hearings on Hunter and 'Big Daddy'.
Biden might be impeached/25th amendment out off office LONG BEFORE TRUMP WOULD WIN IN 2024!!
And if inflation keeps going up to 10-20% while gas goes up to $9-10 a gallon... yea Trump would win in 2024 and Biden sent to jail.
Why? Cause most Americans would RIOT if not.
Woe be Democrats, it won't be a red wave that is coming, it will be a freaking Pompeii Volcano lava flow of biblical proportions*!
*Isaiah 34:9-10
Our president emeritus has been active in supporting primary candidates. Although we hear loudly when they lose, it's crickets when they win.
So far, I think he's about 125 wins and 7-8 losses. That's pretty impressive. Brandon endorsed 1 incumbent, who lost. But hey, 100% so all good.
Perhaps this base plus others who can see the writing on the wall can elect him speaker of the house in November.
John LGBTQBNY Henry
I also agree that this is the motive. The question is will it work? Is there a law that would enable this ? Even blue states might hesitate at this. Of course those are states he would lose anyway. Maybe we should see how many are still "blue" after this November.
Laws? They ignored the laws regarding mail-in ballots in multiple states, not to mention violated rules regarding security of ballots, monitoring by party reps, security of voting machines, etc. The real question is "who'd stop them?"
Imagine if, weeks prior to the election, election officials in blue counties in Michigan, Wisconsin, Georgia, and Pennsylvania all announce that they will not allow Trump on their ballots, nor count any write-in votes for him. Who'd stop them? Dem Secretaries of State?
Raffensberger in Georgia? Do you think that the state legislatures would throw out the election results? I can easily imagine a scenario where Trump is denied ballot access in blue counties, which is enough to tip the state towards the Dem candidate. Lawsuits fly, eventually reaching SCOTUS, who punt and say, "Yeah, he was screwed, but what can you do?"
I don't think the Republicans will be as stupid about controlling ballots as they were in 2020.
The GOP weren't stupid, they were backstabbers. The establishment wanted Trump gone and wanted to claim that Trumpism and America First were losing philosophies. Remember, 2020 was supposed to be a bloodbath for the GOP; the Dems were supposed to expand their control of the House and gain the Senate outright. Even if he'd won, that result would have made Trump politically toxic. GOP consultants would have told every young political hopeful to stay away from Trump, he's bad news for the party. Instead, Trump had coattails that nearly pulled the GOP into the majority. I fully believe that the Steal on election night was a panicked reaction to seeing the House returns and was more about stuffing ballot boxes to gain the Senate than getting Biden into the WH. The GOP, rather than fight it, took the gains and left Trump swinging in the wind hoping that after he'd lost, he'd go away.
LOlz "Oh, no, they're going to do to Biden what we did to Trump!"
Mr Wibble: "They're going to indict Trump in order to provide cover for Blue states and counties to keep him off the ballot."
Under what law? I know of no law banning criminals from running for office. An indictment is a long was from convicted.
\wshelf said...
At least the top three layers in the DOJ must be presumed disloyal, and be replaced. There's nothing in the constitution or in tradition which says that the administration has to endure a disloyal DOJ.
Every single person at the DoJ / FBI who's ever given money to a Democrat candidate needs to be fired. Anyone who ever volunteered for a Democrat, or who was a member of the ACS.
The Left wants to wage war on us. Therefore we need to return the favor
Michael K said...
Mr Wibble said...
They're going to indict Trump in order to provide cover for Blue states and counties to keep him off the ballot.
I also agree that this is the motive. The question is will it work? Is there a law that would enable this ? Even blue states might hesitate at this. Of course those are states he would lose anyway. Maybe we should see how many are still "blue" after this November.
You are forgetting the Republicans that want Trump stopped by any means possible.
The 2020 election fraud happened because of Republicans in Georgia and Arizona and Wisconsin. There are a plethora of Republican Nevertrumpers that are just as dependent on fraud to get elected as the democrats are.
And just read the comments here. Half the "conservatives" want the J6 sham to keep Trump off the ballot so they can go back to a pretty well spoken coifed career politician.
They don't really care about results either and in the end they think they are better than the working class stiffs that support Trump just like the democrats.
iowan2 said...
Mr Wibble: "They're going to indict Trump in order to provide cover for Blue states and counties to keep him off the ballot."
Under what law? I know of no law banning criminals from running for office. An indictment is a long was from convicted.
They impeached Trump without a law being broken.
They don't need a law.
And they will be supported by a bunch of Desantis supporters. This is all tribal flim flam.
"If, God forbid, Trump runs and wins in 2024..."
Psych 201. You can tell they're already preparing mentally for the possibility that it comes to pass. Like a coed who's resistance against inevitable and attractive persistence begins to erode slowly at first and then all at once. Their principles are garbage, their walls filled with air. They can't quit him. They need him...regardless of how many of the people who got him there have moved on to DeSantis.
Trump is the villain they deserve, but not the one they need just yet. So they'll hunt him. Because he can take it. He's a meme-generator. He's a lightning rod. He's a potential nominee.
My understanding is that Trump was a stalking horse candidate in 2016, a distractor from the "serious" republican candidates. He was encouraged and promoted to clear the field for Hillary Clinton much as Nader was used to the benefit of G. W. Bush. That Mr. Trump won is the unimaginable, unforgivable sin.
Since that November day long ago "the Donald" has become the boogey-man of the Democratic partisans. Attempted political exorcisms are not pretty (or rational).
Male Hierarchy Test
where would merrick fit in?
Like he immediately decided to prosecute Hilary Clinton?
He said that through the campaign (I think he thought the crowd liked that language), and after he won, said he didn't want to pursue that. So, no he never 'decided to prosecute Hilary". (also its Hillary).
Whoever the next Republican president is, Trump or someone else, they will benefit from what happened to Trump as president.
============
if what D did to Nixon was not a lesson learned by R -
I would need more convincing about R in other branches supporting such learned actor
If there was any more projection in that statement you would need a drive-in theater screen to see it on.
Thomas said...
My understanding is that Trump was a stalking horse candidate in 2016, a distractor from the "serious" republican candidates. He was encouraged and promoted to clear the field for Hillary Clinton much as Nader was used to the benefit of G. W. Bush. That Mr. Trump won is the unimaginable, unforgivable sin.
*************
Your "understanding" is doo-doo.
If Trump were merely a stalking horse for Hillary, why didn't he support and implement her policies when he got elected "by mistake"?
Nader ran as a 3rd party candidate. Trump was the GOP nominee.
Let's look at 2016:
https://rollcall.com/2019/07/29/how-third-party-votes-sunk-clinton-what-they-mean-for-trump/
"An astounding 7.8 million voters cast their presidential ballots for someone other than Trump or Hillary Clinton. The two biggest third-party vote-getters were Libertarian nominee Gary Johnson (almost 4.5 million votes) and the Green Party’s Jill Stein (1.5 million voters). But others received almost another 1.9 million votes as well."
So your complaint is well off-the-mark. "Out to lunch", actually. You need to blame all those 3rd party people who siphoned votes from Hillary, not Trump or some secret cabal only you are privy to.
There is way too much name calling in the media today. Plus, there is this weird dynamic that so many people think that it's OK if "my side" does it, but HOW DARE! the other side to do it.
But freedom of speech allows you to make an ass of yourself in public.
I must confess that I have been known to throw an insult, or 10, during a heated online argument, but after I do it, I always regret it. It's childish and it totally undermines the point that you initially wanted to make.
I think that it was Harold Pinter who said that his characters resorted to swear words when they knew they had lost the argument.
I believe the sports term for this is: unforced error
You are forgetting the Republicans that want Trump stopped by any means possible.
The 2020 election fraud happened because of Republicans in Georgia and Arizona and Wisconsin. There are a plethora of Republican Nevertrumpers that are just as dependent on fraud to get elected as the democrats are.
And just read the comments here. Half the "conservatives" want the J6 sham to keep Trump off the ballot so they can go back to a pretty well spoken coifed career politician.
I think you are referring to the DC "consultants class." Read Kellyanne Conway's book. She spells it out.
They're going to indict Trump in order to provide cover for Blue states and counties to keep him off the ballot.
..... Is there a law that would enable this..
Why (WHY?) would they need a law to enable it?
Was there a law that said you could have mail-in ballots that weren't mailed? (or even signed?)
Democrats don't need "laws" that's what judges are for
Shorter Stephens: they have to stop Trump before he pulls the same shenanigans on them that they played on him.
Not very persuasive, is it? But it does reflect a desire to return to normal historical patterns. The problem is that Trump’s opposition went too far. Now, fair play dictates that Trump dish out what they have served him.
The New Testament suggests that the better course would be for Trump to forgive his enemies and move on to the broad, sunlit uplands of peace, prosperity, and security. What are the odds?
Amadeus 48 said...
The New Testament suggests that the better course would be for Trump to forgive his enemies and move on to the broad, sunlit uplands of peace, prosperity, and security. What are the odds?
If we were dealing with good people that respected our freedom and fellow citizens that disagree with them this would be true.
But we are not in that situation.
The Democrat Party and their NeverTrump Republican allies are evil fascists that use censorship and violence and persecution of political opponents to gain power over others.
You don't turn the other cheek in this situation. You destroy the evil until it surrenders.
Do I have this right? They are worried that IF Trump wins in 2024, he will attempt to prosecute Biden for (obvious) crimes, which would be a horrible precedent, and THEREFORE Garland needs to prosecute Trump now?
So to avoid the banana republic shenanigans of prosecuting political opponents, we must prosecute our political opponent?
Leftist logic, I guess.
Trump was encouraged and promoted to clear the field for Hillary Clinton
==========
= D plan backfired/ conflagrated and now D want to squelch? quench? the embers?
"You're allowed to impugn a man's masculinity with... which words?* Or are we moving toward regarding all the once-gendered words as nonbinary?"
Ann,
Have you watched the documentary "The Red Pill"? It's free with Amazon Prime and if you do see it, it's likely you'll want to blog about it as it's right up your alley.
The Red Pill:
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3686998/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0
"D plan backfired/ conflagrated and now D want to squelch? quench? the embers?"
Drown your campfire. Stir the ashes. Then drown it again. Remember, only YOU can prevent forest fires.
- Smokey Bear
Does no one take Roman history? Is that not a requirement, even as a survey?
I know not everyone follows Suetonius anymore but the idea that the only way to avoid politically-based prosecution (or persecution, as you might see it) is to hang on to office and/or political power by any means necessary just about guarantees the destruction of the "rule of law" and makes something like open violent conflict much more likely--people see that, right?!
The same pundits who say the Supreme Court's rulings aren't legitimate because some medium-large portion of the population disagree with them are also enthusiastic about nakedly-political prosecutions, using the State to crush distasteful domestic political opponents, even though that action would enrage an even larger portion of the population.
Nothing more Principled than using every possible weapon of the State to attack one's foes!
Does anyone who promoted it, anyone at all, regret the first bullshit impeachment of Trump (with support of the years-long bullshit collusion narrative)? Once upon a time impeachment of a President was understood to be a big deal and to only be appropriate in clear cut cases of wrongdoing. It'd be nice to have the Norm back, I bet.
Biden should appoint Trump propraetor--er, I mean, governor of Puerto Rico or something, with contractual guarantees to build hotels and casinos there. Or maybe buy/annex Greenland, let him run that with a promise to not prosecute for any former crimes in exchange for his guarantee not to run nor hold any office or renunciation of citizenship.
Let's get creative!
Blogger HoodlumDoodlum said...
Biden should appoint Trump propraetor--er, I mean, governor of Puerto Rico or something, with contractual guarantees to build hotels and casinos there. Or maybe buy/annex Greenland, let him run that with a promise to not prosecute for any former crimes in exchange for his guarantee not to run nor hold any office or renunciation of citizenship.
Let's get creative!
Good Question. Why aren't people negotiating with Trump to get him to do what they want? Why is complete destruction of him the only acceptable result? Could it be that media only makes money if there is a fight and Trump is the one who fights best for their bottom line?
In both 2016 and 2020, it seemed to be that the Democratic primary cleared for the benefit of a particular candidate. Rumor was Bernie Sanders' vacation home (his 3rd home) was made possible as part of a negotiation to get him out of the running. In 2020 Buttgeig, Klobuchar and others were in it to win in until Clyburn helped Biden to a victory in South Carolina and then they couldn't drop out fast enough.
Meanwhile Bezos makes billions more.
… any former crimes!?
After all these years: what crimes?
Post a Comment