Writes Richard Hasen in "U.S. v. Trump Will Be the Most Important Case in Our Nation’s History" (Slate).
It is an egregious abuse of power to criminally prosecute someone for the purpose of educating the public and generating publicity for your political position.
It is ludicrous to celebrate the use of a trial for the purpose of generating "constant publicity" against a political candidate right after you've bemoaned that candidate's success in convincing people that the charges against him are "politically motivated." Trump made his argument in the political arena where it belongs. He spoke effectively enough for his cause. If his opponents can't counter his speech with speech, that's a terrible concession. It will serve poetic justice if their use of the criminal process only heightens Trump's argument that the charges against him are politically motivated.
I'm not a Trump supporter. I'm a believer in freedom of speech and the rule of law. I deplore the criminalization of politics.
Hasen proceeds to fret about Trump's ability to push the trial date beyond Election Day, win the presidency, put his own people in charge, pardon himself, and then "then sic his attorney general on political adversaries with prosecutions not grounded in any evidence." Yes, that's a lowly incentive for protecting freedom of speech and the rule of law: You might be able to take out your enemies, but when the tables turn, they are enabled and motivated to come after you. Hasen knows this. He admits it. But he won't come out and say this prosecution is a terrible mistake.
Posts
178 comments:
Here's a technical legal point that I haven't seen elsewhere.
Hack Smith filed a "speaking" indictment, that is, it contains lots of evidence and is not just the bare bones indictment that is usually filed.
That pleading is expecially favorable to a Motion to Dismiss. The defense says, "Even if every word in the indictment is true, it still doesn't state a crime."
And if the judge was smart, she'd grant that motion. Because she could be reversed if she lets it go to trial.
These folks have obsessive-compulsive disorder whereby they repeat past actions endlessly and with no benefit.
We all saw Impeachment #1
We all saw Impeachment #2
We all saw the post-Jan 6 show trial
Continued "Out, out damned spot" mental illness and sustaining a (self-comforting) obsession with undoing unwanted realities and past failures.
https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/obsessive-compulsive-disorder/symptoms-causes/syc-20354432
Intervention time!
"It is an egregious abuse of power to criminally prosecute someone for the purpose of educating the public and generating publicity for your political position."
Correct. But it is the prog modus operandi. They are going after Trump by any means necessary. To them, it is the proper use of power. Consider that what you find "egregious" is what they consider necessary and virtuous.
Deadly serious? That’s not even a serious argument.
Meanwhile, Biden is accused of taking bribes from a corrupt Ukrainian government, which is involved in a war that is killing thousands of civilians.
Here is the basic argument: We have to preserve our democracy, which means that the people better believe what WE want them to believe, or we'll have no other choice than to burn the whole thing down.
Funny thing about democracies: people get to decide. For all those who fear that process, I'm sure Russia would appreciate the influx of your talents and contributions to their cartel.
And if the judge was smart, she'd grant that motion. Because she could be reversed if she lets it go to trial.
She won't care if she's reversed. Her position is safe, and in fact she's likely young enough that a Dem president will eventually hand her a cushy promotion. I would wager that the DoJ at this point expects most of this to be reversed by SCOTUS, but that won't happen until after the election, most likely, and thus is not their concern.
Trump followed the correct Constitutional procedure for contesting the election. It's up to Congress which slate of electors to accept.
Previously in the courts he lacked standing and various other excuses not to decide stuff.
It violates the convention of accepting the counts, though the dems haven't been doing that for a couple of decades. Recount until you win.
"about the actions Trump allegedly took to undermine American democracy and the rule of law."
Trump used his "free speech" to say what Hillary said. Again - free speech is only for the radical left and liars like Joe Biden.
... educate the American public, as the January 6 House committee hearings did to some extent...
Objection. Assumes facts not in evidence. Your Honor, the evidence will show the J6 hearings only proved beyond reasonable doubt that Congress was a craven abused body under Pelosi's leadership. Exhibit A, the "Republican" committee members...
It will serve poetic justice if their use of the criminal process only heightens Trump's argument that the charges against him are politically motivated.
This is right on. A two-time supporter, I desperately want an alternative to Trump, but these political persecutions make even me rally behind him.
QUESTION: What happens if Trump is convicted before the general election? Is he replaced on the ballot and how?
So now I’m seeing this is a case of double jeopardy for Trump as he was already acquitted of these crimes in the Senate. Wouldn’t it be the most poetic justice of all time if that second impeachment was Trump’s ticket to ride? Oh, oh, oh, how delicious.
"...the best chance to educate the American public, as the January 6 House committee hearings did to some extent..." I don't think the public reaction to the House hearings has been what he imagines it to be.
There's probably a 70-80% nationwide consensus that these cases against Trump are (a) legally bogus and (b) politically motivated, especially in light of the fact that far more obvious cases of criminal misconduct on the part of democrats go unpunished (e.g., Hillary and Hunter). But unlike republicans and independents, a clear majority of dems don't care. The only thing they care about is that all government and institutions remain under the control of the left.
Many people are saying this case will be bigger than Marburry v. Madison. An enormously important case, okay? It's going to huge. Bush v. Gore? Meaningless in comparison. You are going to see a case like never been seen.
A boost in fundraising to pay his legal bills. A self-perpetuating continuous loop that amounts to the greatest gofundme scam of the century.
"then sic his attorney general on political adversaries with prosecutions not grounded in any evidence."
Yes, obviously every political opponent will behave in the exact same way that the Democrats do. Another way to look at this is that when you strike at the king, you better not miss.
He is going to prison. They have charted a path of partisan judges and a partisan jury, if Trump goes the jury trial route, which is probably a waste of time. Let the judge take the heat for twisting and inventing the law.
The indictment is 45 pages of "the first amendment does not exist" over and over again.
The indictment is 45 pages of "the first amendment does not exist" over and over again.
"Funny thing about democracies: people get to decide. "
I'm going to amend my previous statement.
Funny thing about democracies: people you consider to be a lot less intelligent and less informed than YOU think yourself to be, get to decide.
QUESTION: What happens if Trump is convicted before the general election? Is he replaced on the ballot and how?
No. A conviction doesn't bar him from running for president, and if the GOP tried to force him out it would backfire on them.
Previously in the courts he lacked standing and various other excuses not to decide stuff.
Good point. The fact this indictment asserts "no fraud happened" as proof of Trump's guilt means that if there is a trial, big IF, perhaps those "irregularities" finally could be litigated.
I heard the media say yesterday "If Trump doesn't gum up the works."
LOL - They are so biased - they are blind to it.
How dare Trump fight all of this - he should just give in to the Stalinist left.
"...the best chance to educate the American public, as the January 6 House committee hearings did to some extent..."
that would have been true, had there been an actual adversarial process involved, and had both sides been able to speak, but like this upcoming show trial will undoubtedly unfold, exculpatory lines of evidence and testimony will be disallowed by the partisan judge.
Trump is not my ideal president either, but we are fighting to "keep our republic," as Ben Franklin put it, and Trump is the only one fighting for it. If Trump is eliminated, I simply won't vote anymore, it will have become a complete joke, unless some candidate convinces me that vengeance for what happened to Trump is his or her primary motivation. Sarah "I can see Russia from my house" Palin, maybe. Is mocking Palin over her concerns that Putin would enter Ukraine still as funny as it was, I wonder.
Leland @ 8:48: "...Meanwhile, Biden is accused of taking bribes from a corrupt Ukrainian government, which is involved in a war that is killing MANY TENS OF thousands of civilians AND IMMISERATING TENS OF MILLIONS."
FIFY
"A self-perpetuating continuous loop that amounts to the greatest gofundme scam of the century."
Bigger even than Black Lives Matter? That's going a ways.
Yet, the corrupt DC mongrels stand together ...
Monica Crowley
@MonicaCrowley
·
The judge in the Trump J6 case - an Obama appointee and donor - worked at the same law firm as Hunter Biden.
This is the level of contempt they have for the Constitution, the rule of law - and YOU.
Just sent Trump a nice check. Keep it up, Smith, Holder and Garland, whatever you think Trump is, you're illustrating the biggest problem in this country.
""... against political repercussions for deadly serious criminal counts."
"Deadly serious?" What crap! The charges are makeweight. Krauthammer was partially correct, we think lefties are stupid. We also think they are evil.
These indictments are election interference, pure and simple. Only the stupidest of Democrats fail to understand that. The perpetrators and their enablers who do understand are the evil Democrats.
Their choices seem to be to admit error or double down on their infamy. Gee. I wonder which they'll choose.
If Trump wasn't running and had faded into the background over the last couple years, would he be facing these charges today?
It is an egregious abuse of power to criminally prosecute someone for the purpose of educating the public and generating publicity for your political position.
They have also not thought through the implications of their actions and the possibility that they may turn Trump into a martyr. They are blinded by their conceit and self regard.
Somewhere in the distance I hear Nemesis cracking her knuckles.
“I'm not a Trump supporter. I'm a believer in freedom of speech and the rule of law. I deplore the criminalization of politics. “
We Trump supporters know you’re not a Trump supporter. That’s okay. We Trump supporters support non-Trump supporters like you. Why? Because you don’t hate America. And that makes you, sadly enough, exceptional.
Now it is obvious why there was a 4-year intense effort to punish any law firm that would dare represent Trump. Now that he has been denied his preferred choice of counsel, the Regime is ready to try Impeachment Number Three. Note that CA is trying right now to disbar Professor John Eastman for the advice he gave Trump in 2020. The hard Left lawfare crowd is both ruthless and shameless, not a good combination when they have so much power and can influence so many.
he’s virtually inoculated himself...
Well, he’s been inoculated, but he didn’t do it by himself.
The harder they go after Trump the more convincing the arguments asserting political motivations become.
Like I said before. These indictments should really be counted as undeclared political contributions.
The Bud Lite self inflicted wound offers a preview (or could I say “hinge moment” instead) into what happens when people get the sense somebody is trying to force something down their throat.
The idea behind the indictment avalanche is to transform the impression voters have of Trump into a criminal, which was somewhat there when people elected him in 2020. In principle, it shouldn’t be too difficult. However, the key ingredient necessary in attempting to make Trump the most unpalatable candidate in history is trust. You gotta trust the people attempting to persuade you by any means necessary. The bottom line is people don’t trust the people going after Trump.
“ I'm not a Trump supporter. I'm a believer in freedom of speech and the rule of law. I deplore the criminalization of politics.” — Yes, I concur.
“ I'm not a Trump supporter. I'm a believer in freedom of speech and the rule of law. I deplore the criminalization of politics.” — Yes, I concur.
Mr. Wibble: "She won't care if she's reversed. Her position is safe, and in fact she's likely young enough that a Dem president will eventually hand her a cushy promotion."
She's a Trump appointee.
"QUESTION: What happens if Trump is convicted before the general election? Is he replaced on the ballot and how?"
Wibble: "No. A conviction doesn't bar him from running for president, and if the GOP tried to force him out it would backfire on them."
The GOPe might just be dumb enough and corrupt enough to do it anyway.
Imagine. If Hillary hadn't lost we would never see the reality of today's democrat corruption machine at work. All Kudos to Trump.
He was once on their inner circle, so he probably knew this would ultimately come to pass.
All Kudos to Trump.
Since the alleged crimes took place while he was president, isn't the only recourse impeachment by Congress? Can't this prosecution be used as pretext to arrest any president for stuff some prosecutor doesn't like? There is a mechanism to deal with presidents-impeachment. Congress is the co-equal branch.
it would be nice to know personal benefits gained by Trump and lives put in danger by Trump.
It may not be Trump who provides the retribution necessary to stop the abuses of the Left. But when the successors and alternatives to Trump appear in the future, the Left may wish it had Trump back.
"She's a Trump appointee."
Really? Where did you hear that? I am genuinely curious.
"The fact this indictment asserts "no fraud happened" as proof of Trump's guilt"
They will simply use the fact that no courts would hear the matter, except PA did and simply declared that it was too late to fix it, but they will use the lack of standing type dismissals as "proof" and not allow any evidence to be heard. Just imagine Schiff was the judge if you want to know how this trial will go. He is going to prison.
People think that they are immune from history, the Etruscans thought that they could live on their beautiful farms on the Mediterranean free from invasion, making art, drinking wine, forever, until one day they couldn't.
No. A conviction doesn't bar him from running for president, and if the GOP tried to force him out it would backfire on them.
============
why not put Trump in Guantanamo [= US Isle of Elba] and see if he can buoyantly float to Florida for his triumphal inaugural!!! with live satellite tracking of "Orange Dot"
>>>> guilty if floats successfully and guilty if sinks and drowns
from what I read the new improved second set of charges will be before different judge - Obama appointed.
is there any double jeopardy involved? does it even matter?
If Trump wasn't running and had faded into the background over the last couple years, would he be facing these charges today?
Yes. The Left has be braying for blood for a long time. The major difference is that, if Trump wasn't running, the GOP would already have washed their hands of it and left him to be thrown in prison.
Echoing some of above, where I voted for Trump but got really turned off to him after his post election antics and strongly in the DeSantis camp. But no longer. I really thought Smith was going to show a bit of deference here, given the active case in Miami and issue an indictment with Trump not part of it, but with a handful of surrogates named. After reading it, I’m now back to supporting Trump in the Republican primary and the general.
This will help Trump in the primary yet most likely minimally impact him in the general. I think Biden is the one the gets hurt more with votes that otherwise would go for him staying home or bleeding off to 3rd party Greens or Libertarians. I think some of this in part will be due to relitigating some of the state elections Trump claimed were fraudulent and while ultimately proven false or outright dismissed, awareness about issues with voting machines or last minute Lawfare in certain jurisdictions like Pennsylvania.
Really sad day for the Republic yesterday.
BTW, the criminalization of politics didn't start with Trump. Bob McDonnell, Tom DeLay, Rick Perry, Ted Stevens, etc... the left has been using this tactic for decades, getting more brazen each time.
"It is an egregious abuse of power to criminally prosecute someone for the purpose of educating the public and generating publicity for your political position."
I'm not able to read the actual article because it's paywalled for me, but there's nothing in what you quote that should cause you to infer that Hasen is advocating Trump be tried solely or even primarily for an educational purpose. I understand him to be saying that a trial, in addition to its proper purpose--determining a defendant's guilt or innocence--can also educate the public in a "sunlight is the best disinfectant" kind of way. Certainly trials have had that effect over the years, and there's nothing egregious about that--it's a vital public interest.
We Trump supporters know you’re not a Trump supporter. That’s okay. We Trump supporters support non-Trump supporters like you. Why? Because you don’t hate America. And that makes you, sadly enough, exceptional.
Except you support a guy that literally suggested the fraud that he can't prove justifies "the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution."
https://reason.com/volokh/2022/12/05/trump-defines-constitutional-deviancy-down/
I can't think of a single thing more Un-American than suspending the Constitution because you don't get your way. And, I can't think a single thing more lawless than (ya know) "the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution."
Biden, the Dems, and the DOJ are corrupt P.O.S. But, Trump is hardly better. The only thing that makes him better is that he doesn't have the power to act. I'd like to keep it that way.
“Stick with me, baby,
anyhow
Things will start to
get interesting right
about now”
U.S. v. Trump Will Be the Most Important Case in Our Nation’s History
Hasan could be correct. This seems entirely plausible.
If Trump can run out the clock before conviction and be reelected, though, he can get rid of Jack Smith and appoint an attorney general who will do his bidding. He could even try to pardon himself from charges if elected in 2024 (a gambit that may or may not be legal). He could then sic his attorney general on political adversaries with prosecutions not grounded in any evidence, something he has repeatedly promised on the campaign trail.
At this point, we are a banana republic and no longer a serious country. Does this give pause to anyone in positions of power?
Down to the Banana Republic. . . .
The indictment states as "evidence" that the courts have already rejected his claims, The judge will clamp down on any efforts to reopen that box. Trump is going to jail.
“”I can't think of a single thing more Un-American than suspending the Constitution because you don't get your way. And, I can't think a single thing more lawless than (ya know) "the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution."”
Except for maybe Abraham Lincoln (when he was wearing his hat.)
The indictment states as "evidence" that the courts have already rejected his claims, The judge will clamp down on any efforts to reopen that box. Trump is going to jail.
M Jordan said...
So now I’m seeing this is a case of double jeopardy for Trump as he was already acquitted of these crimes in the Senate.
---------------------------------------------------------
You'll have to demonstrate how jeopardy attaches to legislative proceedings.
"I can't think of a single thing more Un-American than suspending the Constitution because you don't get your way. "
Is saying it illegal though? The Biden regime is actually doing it, by treating protected political speech as criminal. But that's OK, as long as they don't *say* that they are gutting the First Amendment. Trump's statement may be a reason to vote against him, but it's not a reason to thrown him in prison.
"This will help Trump in the primary yet most likely minimally impact him in the general."
Really? Have you ever been to trial? Defending four (maybe up to six) trials and trying to run a campaign will be really tough. That's the whole point. The dems know this will boost Trump in the primaries but how does he hold his giant campaign rallies when he is flying from one courthouse to the next?
The GOP is being played once again. It's too easy.
"He could then sic his attorney general on political adversaries with prosecutions not grounded in any evidence, "
What? Like Russiagate?
"Except for maybe Abraham Lincoln (when he was wearing his hat.)"
I know you are smarter than this. Not taking the bait.😘
"And if the judge was smart, she'd grant that motion. Because she could be reversed if she lets it go to trial."
She has lifetime tenure. She'd rather be reversed and a hero to the left than be affirmed and become a pariah.
"deadly serious criminal counts."
Richard Hasen is clearly paid by the adverb.
"... he's virtually inoculated himself ..."
Actually, it's the public that has been inoculated, both literally and figuratively. And we're developing herd immunity. Must be worrisome, if you're the contagion.
"Trump's statement may be a reason to vote against him, but it's not a reason to thrown him in prison."
Agree.
If Trump wins the 2024 General Election it won’t matter a whole lot if he’s in prison. The incoming President does not have to be sworn in by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, nor does of office have to be sworn in front of the Capitol. Teddy Roosevelt, Chester Arthur, and Calvin Coolidge were three people took the oath of office in private homes, and 60 years ago Lyndon Johnson swore the oath of office aboard Air Force One while it was on the tarmac at Dallas Love Field. Nor does the President even have to use a Bible — Teddy Roosevelt didn’t, and John Adams sword his oath on a copy of the Constitution.
But he won't come out and say this prosecution is a terrible mistake...
Is that your own position, Althouse?
I sort of expect that what you are saying is that Hasen's stated position logically requires him to ultimately agree that the prosecution is a terrible mistake. I guarantee that Hasen does not agree with that, and would argue the point with you. As a fellow lawprof, he might give you the time to do that. I would not only like to hear that exchange, I would pay for that privilege. I wonder about this, because the way you wrote the quoted sentence makes me seriously wonder if it is your own position that "this prosecution is a terrible mistake."
D.D. Driver
"I can't think of a single thing more Un-American than suspending the Constitution because you don't get your way."
****************
We all must have missed Trump "suspending" ANYTHING.
Please enlighten us.
The dems know this will boost Trump in the primaries but how does he hold his giant campaign rallies when he is flying from one courthouse to the next?
I argue that this would be a good thing for Trump. He’s too addicted to those damned rallies and needs a better strategy to spread his message.
"Trump's statement may be a reason to vote against him, but it's not a reason to thrown him in prison."
That's uppermost in my mind now. Asking my fellow Americans to vote against Trump. I won't have any effect on the multiple civil and criminal trials, but I can talk to fellow voters in Michigan.
And, just by way of example, I plan to start with all of my Republican friends here in our battleground state, where our votes make a real difference, and ask them how they would feel if the guy they voted for as MI Attorney General -- the Trump-allied, Trump-sponsored Matt DePerno, now under indictment for election crimes -- had actually won that job.
"U.S. v. Trump Will Be the Most Important Case in Our Nation’s History"
Meanwhile, Trump refuses to take any of this seriously.
He better wise up. Unfair, unjust, unlawful as it may be, this IS serious and his usual behavior will only hurt him legally.
just to recap..
This is about things, that:
a) happened WHILE he was President?
b) he was impeached for?
c) he was found innocent OF?
d) voters already know about?
SO... Once resident Biden is out of office (and assuming, that SOMEHOW he's replaced by a republican)..
Biden can EXPECT to be either sent to prison? or executed for treason? or just executed?
Is THAT REALLY the reality that the dems want?
"Here in Illinois, our Governors serve 2 terms, the 1st in Springfield; the 2nd in prison"
Oh! never mind
If Joe Biden were smart, at some point he would say, "The evidence is compelling, but for the sake of the nation, I am prepared to grant a pardon to Trump if he wants it," then dare Trump to accept.
Being the fool that he is, Trump would probably respond with, "I don't need any pardon." Then Biden would withdraw the offer and Trump would be tied up in criminal appeals for years.
"I know you are smarter than this."
That's a weird way to say "I disagree with you."
I've said it before and my thoughts on it haven't changed - nothing Trump has said has convinced me of his innocence, it's the one-sidedness of it that makes me not care. I have heard as much (often more) about things Biden has done that led to the impeachment of Trump, yet nothing happens.
Trump may have done things that are criminal but the charges just look political.
At some point even the dullest rube (and I'm not talking about the so called "rubes" out there in flyove country) will see that this is a crooked game. Not that Biden could ever manage to swing into the saddle on a white horse and become a caudillo [the old boy would fall off even one of those phony little horses outside a supermarket intended for four year olds to play horsey]. But these repeated indictments by Dim politicians masquerading as prosecuting attorneys are banana republic stuff. And the rubes I'm talking about live in blue states.
I'm not a Trump supporter. I'm a believer in freedom of speech and the rule of law. I deplore the criminalization of politics.
Althouse. You are a believer in free speech But you passed on the 2020 voter fraud, which is now more apparent than ever. Tagging Texas vs PA as "lawsuits I'd like to fail". "Moving on" was an egregious error.
Whether or not you support Trump, I don't see that you were concerned about the "rule of law" after the 2020 election. Some of the illegal voter fraud activity happened right in broad daylight in Madison, WI. "Ballot harvesting in the park" was illegal. And then the Madison clerk mixed those ballots with one's that were legitimately submitted to destroy chain of custody. They were stuffing absentee ballots.
I'm not saying there was anything you could do about it, nor that you are responsible.
But if you know in you heart the 2020 election was fraudulent, and just thought it was better to "move on" there is no more "rule of law" to support. We are here now, forever, and there is not going back.
Well doofus, all of the charges against him ALL OF THEM, have been politically motivated to keep him from becoming POTUS again. It's not as if the democrat fascists deny it, they state it openly.
Did anyone in the mainstream media or what's left of the sane political world, including those such as Mike Pence who are now cheering on this latest unconstitutional obscenity, say at the time that Trump's challenge of the election results was a crime that should put him in prison for the rest of his life?
Show me.
Blogger D.D. Driver said...
Except you support a guy that literally suggested the fraud that he can't prove justifies "the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution."
There is no amount of proof you would accept. Sending electors back to the states is constitutional, but Mike Pence was a corrupt pussy.
Our voting and counting systems are purposefully un-auditable. Our courts failed the country denying any type of relief. Your vote doesn't mean shit anymore, and the feds are making sure you understand that.
Jack Smith Admits Making False Claim to Court In Trump Case
Special Counsel Jack Smith’s team made a startling admission in its case against former President Donald Trump, acknowledging in a new court filing that it failed to turn over all evidence to Mr. Trump’s legal team as required by law while falsely claiming it had.
"A trial is the best chance to educate the American public, as the January 6 House committee hearings did to some extent, about the actions Trump allegedly took to undermine American democracy and the rule of law."
The problem with the charges is they're 100% political. They're charging Trump for saying false things that made people mad, who then rioted. I look forward to all the prosecutions of the race hustlers who lie about police hunting young black bodies or green wackos who lie about our impending climate doom which lies make people angry enough to riot and commit other crimes. I have a feeling I'll be waiting awhile.
Of course, the leftists bringing the charges, and their supporters, long ago abandoned any pretense that there are distinction to be made between what is right vs what is legal, what is moral vs what is political, what is bad vs. what is unconstitutional, or what is criminal vs what is uncouth.
Blogger tim in vermont said...
They will simply use the fact that no courts would hear the matter, except PA did and simply declared that it was too late to fix it, but they will use the lack of standing type dismissals as "proof" and not allow any evidence to be heard. Just imagine Schiff was the judge if you want to know how this trial will go. He is going to prison.
Too late. Pencils down. Nothing we can do now. Game over. Now you get to live under and installed, corrupt, unaccountable President. Let's all just move on.
There's no going back. The American courts failed to protect "democracy", and they keep growing in power along with unelected bureaucrats.
We will now watch the American "justice" system throw dirt on the body and make sure the last remanence of "government by the people" is buried.
"Hasen proceeds to fret about Trump's ability to push the trial date beyond Election Day"
He has to be joking, right?
Does he really think the prosecutors just happened to get their case ready now?
They have had 2.5 years to charge him for this. They waited for election season, something, we were told they couldn't do in Hillary's case.
They're playing with fire.
Trump will not be the nominee. Establishment GOP hates Trump as much as Dems. At the convention a way will be found to exclude him. GOP folks know many Trump supporters will not vote for anyone else. They don't care who the next president is. Getting rid of Trump is all that matters. They don't call it the Uniparty for no reason.
There is no amount of proof you would accept. Sending electors back to the states is constitutional, but Mike Pence was a corrupt pussy.
How about the names of the conspirators? It's been how many years now. And not just a bunch of crybaby grousing. Trump dismissed HIS OWN CASE(!!!) in Georgia. If he had proof we would have seen it.
There are three reasons to dismiss you own case:
1. The stakes are too low. (Not true here.)
2. You cannot afford the cost of litigation. (Not true here.)
3. Your case is bullshit (Bingo!)
We all must have missed Trump "suspending" ANYTHING.
Please enlighten us.
I'm quoting Trump directly. Your defense is that he hasn't done it yet? 🤔
Very well said, Professor.
A self-perpetuating continuous loop that amounts to the greatest gofundme scam of the century
Why "scam" Cassandra? What is scammish about a legal defense fund? People do it all the time and have since forever.
It would be a scam if it purported to raise money for lawyers and legal and then spent it on something else. Is there any past behavior or evidence to suspect that this might happen?
Words have meanings, Cassandra. You should think about how you use them.
And is our President Emeritus soliciting contributions for legal defense? Is there a legal defense fund for him anywhere? (Link so I can can contribute, please)
Go Fund Me has a history of slectivly banning legal defense funds where they don't like the politics. Would they even permit a PEDJT defense fund?
John Henry
Trump went beyond free speech, when he conspired to take away the right of the people to vote for their chosen leaders by the fake elector scheme. From running his mouth to criminality.
Free speech veers into criminality when he conspires to stop the certification of the election of Biden.
To dismiss the crimes he committed by simply dismissing it as free speech is a sad and pathetic attempt to keep the cult leader in power.
Honor the rule of law by not allowing the American people to have their votes nullified by criminal acts.
"They're charging Trump for saying false things that made people mad, who then rioted."
No, it's worse, they are charging him for saying things that they claim to know that he believed were false.
We still haven't had an honest look into the riots either. We know that the FBI had agents there, probably agent provocateurs, based on the way some of the inciters were chummy with the cops prior to the real action, and we know that the FBI refuses to fess up on how many and what they were doing there. We don't know why Ray Epps is so connected to the establishment that he gets a first tier law firm and puff pieces in the MSM, and why the Democrats keep telling us to lay off him, when all the evidence seems to show that he was inciting people to go into the Capitol, while he himself refused to go.
Now he is being charged, and his defense aligns amazingly well with this political persecution cooked up by Garland. Who, BTW, was supposed to be a Supreme Court Just Us, after a seat opened up after a mysterious death on a hunting trip that was never investigated, and the body was quickly cremated, before being sent home. Oddly.
If I expressed an opinion that the 2020 election was fraudulent, and Joe Biden was illegitimately installed in the White House, could I be jailed and disqualified from being elected should I run for political office? What about those that attended the protest in D.C. on January 6, 2021? Are they automatically disqualified from future political office and subject to prison sentences based upon their opinion and attendance?
Trump expressed an opinion that Biden was "elected" by fraud. He or his supporters filed lawsuits accusing various election officials of fraud. Most, if not all cases were dismissed on technicalities having nothing to do with the evidence. Trump did not attempt to physically stay in the White House although appeals may have been filed in those cases. Trump vacated the White House at the required time and Biden was sworn into office. In this nation, we have the right to speak as we find and to petition the government to listen to our grievances. I hope any indictment against Trump in this case is swiftly dismissed as a violation of his First Amendment rights.
Remember when Scalia met some guys he didn't really know, who belonged to a secret society, and who invited him on a hunting trip from which only his cremated remains returned?
An Italian should have been smarter than that.
If Trump wasn't running and had faded into the background over the last couple years, would he be facing these charges today?
Did that work for Assange? They want to kill him. Trump now knows too much.
"a trial... to educate the American public".
This is a threat.
“Trump's statement may be a reason to vote against him, but it's not a reason to thrown him in prison."
Trump’s actions are what caused him to be indicted for crimes, not his speech. Fake electors, or a VP who could overturn hundreds of thousands of votes of Americans is a criminal act. It is not legal.
MB said...
...
Trump may have done things that are criminal but the charges just look political.
8/2/23, 11:16 AM
I'd correct that to:
Trump may have done things that look criminal but the charges are political.
Just sent our president emeritus a letter with $100 cash enclosed.
I explained it was a no strings gift and he could use it to take Melania to lunch, legal fees, campaign or any other purpose.
Why cash? We see what happens to Trump supporters who are too visible. How far down the food chain will they be going in 6 months? A year?
Why take a chance.
John Henry
"It is an egregious abuse of power to criminally prosecute someone for the purpose of educating the public and generating publicity for your political position....I'm a believer in freedom of speech and the rule of law. I deplore the criminalization of politics. "
You said it, Sister.
Biden, the Dems, and the DOJ are corrupt P.O.S. But, Trump is hardly better.
Got any examples?
Of Trump corruption, before, during or after his presidency, that is.
John Henry
The dems know this will boost Trump in the primaries but how does he hold his giant campaign rallies when he is flying from one courthouse to the next?
He holds a rally at the airport on his way to the courthouse.
In reality though, he's a billionaire. He doesn't need to go to the courthouse. Ever. It won't get to trial before the election. And even if it does, it would be the biggest campaign rally in the world. 24x7. It will make the OJ trial look like Night Court.
He's going to make pronouncements on the courthouse steps. The judge will threaten to hold him in contempt and he won't care. There are no consequences. Put him in Jail for contempt for trying to talk to the American people? That just makes this look even more like a witch hunt. He's not a Jan 6 defendant with no money and no resources and no name recognition.
This is why the trial will be pushed back past the election. They hope it will cause him to quit. To give up in exchange for the charges being dropped.
Shorter Democrats: We can't let people vote for Trump because of democracy.
U.S. v. Trump Will Be the Most Important Case in Our Nation’s History
Except it isn’t U.S. v. Trump. It’s Democrats v. The American People.
"actions Trump allegedly took to undermine American democracy and the rule of law."
If he broke the law, prosecute him for breaking the law.
Alleged actions "to undermine American democracy and the rule of law" are supposed to be permitted in this country, where they are not in violation of actual written laws.
To challenge what you percieve as unfair and undemocratic application of election procedures is the essence of "American democracy" as envisioned by those who drew up our Contitution. Even if you are wrong.
To prosecute a political actor for allegedly attempting to "undermine democracy" is itself inimical to our Constitutionally declared rights.
MLK attempted to undermine "American democracy and the rule of law" because he believed that the rules were being unfairly applied and the law itself was unfair. He was right. Trump is obviously not MLK (hah!) but the right and privelege to challenge and protest "the rule of law" is the foundation of our country.
If Joe Biden were smart, at some point he would say, "The evidence is compelling, but for the sake of the nation, I am prepared to grant a pardon to Trump if he wants it," then dare Trump to accept.
Trump would take it. Then spin it as even Biden thinks the prosecutors are out of touch. And he'd be right.
In the effort to call Trump's "lies" deadly serious criminal behavior, we are expected the number of times Democrats lied about the cause of death of officer Brian Sicknick.
Of course, we are also expected to forget the Democrats that funded the bail of "peaceful protesters" that burned and destroyed cities nationwide in 2020 and during a truly deadly pandemic (although not quite as deadly as the CDC originally led is to believe). There is going to be a lot of criminal trials in the years ahead, now that Democrats consider political speech unprotected.
This is why the trial will be pushed back past the election. They hope it will cause him to quit. To give up in exchange for the charges being dropped.
Not impossible, but not likely to happen, either.
Scott Patton said...
If Trump wasn't running and had faded into the background over the last couple years, would he be facing these charges today?
Yes. Outsiders need to know that they will be punished for upsetting the apple cart.
MB said...
I've said it before and my thoughts on it haven't changed - nothing Trump has said has convinced me of his innocence, it's the one-sidedness of it that makes me not care. I have heard as much (often more) about things Biden has done that led to the impeachment of Trump, yet nothing happens.
Trump may have done things that are criminal but the charges just look political.
In court Trump doesn't have to prove his innocence. And based on what you know now, and even stated- you would have to vote "not guilty". After all, Trump may have done things are criminal. But you can't name them. Neither can any run of the mill Democrat posting here on Althouse, or on my Facebook feed, or anywhere else. They KNOW Trump is guilty of something, so it doesn't matter what he's charged with, just find him guilty! So jusrice will be served!
I can name Biden's crimes, both Hunter's and his papa Joe. Extortion and bribery. And the laptop has all the evidence needed to convict. Archer's testimony is just additional proof.
I can name Hillary's major crime WITH PROOF. Mishandling of classified material, that is, sending classified information through unclassified non-secure email networks. Along with-conspiracy to avoid FOIA laws by maintaining a private served and email to conduct official business. As said, conspiracy requires other people- the people who maintained the server, and all her staff- government employees- who knew about and used it to communicate with her. Oh- and Obama- who apparently communicated with her using her personal and private email. I don't know if she bothered communicating with Joe.
Now- succinctly name Trump's crimes- it can't be done.
Brian said...
If Joe Biden were smart, at some point he would say, "The evidence is compelling, but for the sake of the nation, I am prepared to grant a pardon to Trump if he wants it," then dare Trump to accept.
Biden would never pardon Trump, because the DoJ Office of the Pardon Attorney would never recommend it at any time at which Joe Biden is President (next six years).
I absolutely expect that Biden will not pardon Hunter Biden. Not for anything -- misdemeanor, felony, whatever -- for the same reason. Biden, being a normal president, would generally (perhaps not purely, or perfectly) follow standard protocols for pardons.
So Biden would not do pardons for a rogue's gallery of political scumbags like Steve Bannon, Roger Stone, Michael Flynn, George Papadopoulos, Paul Manafort, Dinesh D'Souza, Duncan Hunter or Duke Cunningham. Nor would Biden pardon people based on personal relations and friendship like Charles Kushner, Eddie deBartolo Jr., or Rod Blagojevich. Or public pandering like Kwame Kilpatrick and Joe Arpaio.
Filthy, laughable pardons. Made all the worse by credible evidence that people like Rudy Giuliani were in the business of selling executive clemency.
I'm quoting Trump directly. Your defense is that he hasn't done it yet?"
No, "our" defense isn't that he hasn't done those things yet- it is that he didn't do those things- full stop. He is now being prosecuted despite not doing to those things.
Finally heard the recording of Smith’s li’l press conference and I was surprised by his nervous, overly-excited and lisping delivery and concluded “here’s one more asshole” propped up by a media in search of far-left heroes.
Darkisland said...
Just sent our president emeritus a letter with $100 cash enclosed.
I explained it was a no strings gift and he could use it to take Melania to lunch, legal fees, campaign or any other purpose.
Why cash? We see what happens to Trump supporters who are too visible. How far down the food chain will they be going in 6 months? A year?
Why take a chance.
John Henry
So I bolded "campaign." Your cash gift for any campaign, or directly to any declared candidate, must be reported under the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, and the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002.
“ I'm not able to read the actual article because it's paywalled for me, but there's nothing in what you quote that should cause you to infer that Hasen is advocating Trump be tried solely or even primarily for an educational purpose. I understand him to be saying that a trial, in addition to its proper purpose--determining a defendant's guilt or innocence--can also educate the public in a "sunlight is the best disinfectant" kind of way. Certainly trials have had that effect over the years, and there's nothing egregious about that--it's a vital public interest.”
I didn’t say anything that wasn’t precisely true. Neither of us can read Hasen’s mind, but I will say that he seemed enthused about a phenomenon that should not be the reason for bringing these charges. I am skeptical and chose to state how wrong it would be. Don’t you agree?
"Can Mark Meadows or Cassidy Hutchenson, testify that Trump told them that he lost the election?"
Would be irrelevant. He did the lose the election, just not a fair one would be the reply, and not reasonable proof of a lie
Additionally, the lie, even if Smith could prove the impossible, also isn't a crime.
Purely coincidental:
1) US Treasuries downgraded from AAA to AA.
2) Devon Archer’s testimony on Capital Hill
3) Project Veritas announces proof that Ashley Biden’s diary is real, ergo Joe Biden did —inappropriately — shower with his daughter
And, purely coincidentally, …
4) U.S. v. Trump announced.
Show us the law, Inga. And I am not talking about the Electoral Count Act, which was passed after the fact.
Trump’s actions are what caused him to be indicted for crimes, not his speech. Fake electors, or a VP who could overturn hundreds of thousands of votes of Americans is a criminal act. It is not legal.
Well I see the dullard has returned. There were allegations of vote fraud, which I think plausible and the "votes" overturned were not valid. Hillary tried the same thing in 2016 but, of course, she was a member of the home team.
Blogger D.D. Driver said...
"And if the judge was smart, she'd grant that motion. Because she could be reversed if she lets it go to trial."
She has lifetime tenure. She'd rather be reversed and a hero to the left than be affirmed and become a hero to Americans .
FIFY
cfs said...
If I expressed an opinion that the 2020 election was fraudulent, and Joe Biden was illegitimately installed in the White House, could I be jailed and disqualified from being elected should I run for political office?
No.
What about those that attended the protest in D.C. on January 6, 2021?
No.
Are they automatically disqualified from future political office and subject to prison sentences based upon their opinion and attendance?
No; only those with insurrection-related criminal convictions.
Trump expressed an opinion that Biden was "elected" by fraud. He or his supporters filed lawsuits accusing various election officials of fraud. Most, if not all cases were dismissed on technicalities having nothing to do with the evidence.
That is more misleading than it is true. No one ever produced any good evidence, anywhere, of any major election illegality that swung the election in any state, nor the electoral college. Not in something like 61 of 62 cases. If there were some great convincing evidence of a stolen election, it could have been published in the Epoch Times, broadcast on Fox News, etc. It hasn't been shown in court, not in any state legislature, not before any state canvassing board, not with any law enforcement agency.
Trump did not attempt to physically stay in the White House although appeals may have been filed in those cases.
Appeals WERE filed. None of them were successful for Trump. Including two U.S. Supreme Court appeals. (Considerations, at least.)
Trump vacated the White House at the required time and Biden was sworn into office.
True. Trump vacated the White House. And as he moved out, he took with him items that now appear to be covered by the Presidential Records Act, and by the Espionage Act. And to Trump's eternal disgrace, he fled DC without attending his successor's inauguration.
In this nation, we have the right to speak as we find and to petition the government to listen to our grievances. I hope any indictment against Trump in this case is swiftly dismissed as a violation of his First Amendment rights.
I can assure you that if a valid First Amendment defense exists for Trump in this case, it will be advanced by capable counsel, heard by a US District Court Judge, and by the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, and possibly by the U.S. Supreme Court. I expect that such a defense will be a colossal failure. But you and I can just wait and see and the courts will decide it for us.
From Justice Stephen Breyer's concurrence (joined by Justice Kagan) in US v Alvarez (2012), holding that the Stolen Valor Act was unconstitutional on the grounds that punishing false speech (even if it's knowingly false) has the potential to chill the protections of the First Amendment:
"It also applies in political contexts, where although such lies are more likely to cause harm, the risk of censorious selectivity by prosecutors is also high."
Rabel said...
"Did anyone in the mainstream media or what's left of the sane political world, including those such as Mike Pence who are now cheering on this latest unconstitutional obscenity, say at the time that Trump's challenge of the election results was a crime that should put him in prison for the rest of his life?"
Show *us*.
The media said things about George Floyd that made people riot - to the tune of billions in property damage.
"It is an egregious abuse of power"
I appreciate Althouse keeping tabs and objecting.
But what will it take for all the nice, reasonable women in America, the ones that are left, to acknowledge that every single thing progs do and have done against Trump is an "egregious abuse of power"? That most of Biden's "policies," from loan cancellation to border opening, are an "egregious abuse of power"? That progs like the "abuse"? And that progs count on the nice women's vote to keep it going?
This is driven by much more than a simple political calculation to keep Trump out of office.
At the root of this is pure, irrational hate, bordering on bloodlust.
One of the charges carries a potential death sentence.
I said before that they want to put him in prison. I now believe many of them want more than that.
President Emeritus Donald Trump,
c/o Mar-a-Lago Club,
1100 S. Ocean Blvd.,
Palm Beach, FL 33480
Personal address. Does not, as far as I can tell, go to any campaign committee or other organization.
John Henry
Ann Althouse said...
“ I'm not able to read the actual article because it's paywalled for me, but there's nothing in what you quote that should cause you to infer that Hasen is advocating Trump be tried solely or even primarily for an educational purpose. I understand him to be saying that a trial, in addition to its proper purpose--determining a defendant's guilt or innocence--can also educate the public in a "sunlight is the best disinfectant" kind of way. Certainly trials have had that effect over the years, and there's nothing egregious about that--it's a vital public interest.”
I didn’t say anything that wasn’t precisely true. Neither of us can read Hasen’s mind, but I will say that he seemed enthused about a phenomenon that should not be the reason for bringing these charges. I am skeptical and chose to state how wrong it would be. Don’t you agree?
8/2/23, 1:05 PM
I don't think that there has been a single commenter in the history of this blog who has more regularly praised Althouse for her "Law" (legal topic-related) blog posts and comments, than I. In the Trump era, where I have become one of the most-hated commenters simply for my regular criticisms of PDJT, I have continued to praise Althouse for the quality of her "law" posts and comments.
This Althouse comment from today may be the worst and least-defensible "law" comment I have ever seen from Althouse.
Yes, Althouse, I agree that it would be wrong -- certainly unethical and likely illegal -- to bring a federal felony prosecution simply, ONLY, for purposes of a claimed public education purpose.
At the same time, it is laudable that a valid, righteous prosecution would also have a public education effect in addition to being a vindication of the law.
That was so clearly cdb's well-written comment, that I cannot understand how you missed it.
Kudos to commenter cdb.
The saddest part of the indictment is that Trump was correct. So were the protestors that showed up on J6. The COVID massaged absentee voter fraud was real in the targeted swing states. Every other point is chicken shit. The successful voter fraud is the crux of all matters.
As a result, there is an American financed proxy war going on with Russia. The indictment is nothing more than a double down to protect the 2020 voter fraud.
If we are truly run by a government "of the people" than when fraud is successful there is no more government "of the people". And therefor there is no more "rule of law" to hold as a sacred principle. It tossed EVERYTHING out the window.
Say goodnight Gracie.
I was today years old when I first saw the word “allegedly” used in relation to charges against Trump.
THe Democrats are painting the country into a corner. If they vote for Biden, everything they've done to Trump becomes normalized. No one, with half a brain, wants what the Democrats have done to Trump, normalized. The best alternative would be for the RNC to point this out and make this the rallying call for the 2024 election. It's not a hard argument to make.
Skeptical Voter said:
"At some point even the dullest rube (and I'm not talking about the so called "rubes" out there in flyove country) will see that this is a crooked game."
Oh, how I wish I could regain that optimism you have about even the dullest rubes...
By the way; commenters on this page who are not election law nerds may not realize who Rick Hasen is.
Rick Hasen is a UCLA lawprof, and has been a visiting lawprof at more places than I could count. And he's testified for Congress more times than I can recall. By any reasonable reckoning, he's among the handful of leading election law experts in the country. He doesn't do a lot of front-line litigating himself, and doesn't do any front line politics. His academic causes place him just a little left of center; he is certainly not far left. He has published on practically any election law issue you could imagine. His life is basically devoted to free and fair and proper elections.
No, "our" defense isn't that he hasn't done those things yet- it is that he didn't do those things- full stop. He is now being prosecuted despite not doing to those things.
There are two questions, here:
1. Should Trump go to prison? Answer: no.
2. Should Trump be anywhere near the White House ever again: also no.
This thread started with Meade's cheeky remark about how Trumpies "love America." That's comical. That is only true if you equate Trump with America. Trump has no love for the Constitution, especially the First Amendment (recall: he is the one who wants to "open up the libel laws" so no one can criticize him) nor does he care much for the "rule of law."
The mere sniff that a candidate believe he is above the Constitution should be a dealbreaker. If Biden or Obama had made the statement that Trump, are you guys going to tell me you would be cool with it? "Termination" of the Constitution?! Trumpies wet their pants about people kneeling during the National Anthem but will say nothing (other than invoke Old Abe) when their Dear Leader suggests we "terminate" the Constitution.
Madness. Stupidity. You get the government you deserve. We live in Banana Republic for sure. I guess to his credit, Trump is at least HONEST about how he wants the US to be a banana republic and doesn't sneak around like the Dems. He tells you to your face on Truth Social.
Still, there are a few of us that don't want to live in a banana republic no matter who is in charge. I'm one of them. 🙋♂️
It seems likely to me that those who are cheering on this prosecution are likely to regret its consequences. Challenging election results and contending that the process was unfair are frequently what losers tend to say. Just part of the political game.
As for the indictment's three conspiracy counts and one obstruction count, the conspirators all seem to have been Trump's attorneys or his political operatives. The agreement was to take action -- mostly in the form of speech, either publicly claiming Trump was robbed by fraud or to responsible players in the electoral process urging them to do something which they all seem to have refused to do. His public claims of fraud came to nothing, and it's very hard to see how such public statements, obviously political in nature, an amount to a crime. As for urging public officials (the VP, various governors, etc.) to take action to counter the election fraud Trump claimed, again it's just political speech and, to boot, speech directed to gov't officials seeking the redress for grievances (real or imagined). Not seeing the crime, and seeing very clearly why there are may excellent reasons not to embrace (or to assert in an indictment) this legal theory.
It's no answer to say that Trump knew it was all a lie (very doubtful since he probably believed his own BS, but go with the assumption). Politicians are always lying, usually to protect themselves or their team, and often in the expectation that their lie will influence other political actors to remain on the team despite knowing full well that it's based on a lie. Some will recall the "Stolen Valor" case -- United States v. Alvarez, 567 U.S. 709 (2012) -- in which lying about one's military exploits was deemed protected speech because of the ramifications of the prosecution for First Amendment protections. Here those ramifications are much, much more significant. We've seen that reality many times, and are seeing it today with the Hunter/Big Boy stuff, the fake Russian collusion stuff, the Hillary "you mean wipe it with a cloth?" BS, the Bill Clinton "it turns on what the meaning of 'is' is", and on and on.
Very, very crazy to pursue an indictment like this -- even if it could be sustained in court, which remains to be seen.
D.D. Driver said...
"No, "our" defense isn't that he hasn't done those things yet- it is that he didn't do those things- full stop. He is now being prosecuted despite not doing to those things.
There are two questions, here:
1. Should Trump go to prison? Answer: no.
2. Should Trump be anywhere near the White House ever again: also no."
Under Biden our Bond rating went from AAA to AA and the market dumped 350 points.
Under Trump I was a quarter of a million dollars richer.
Under Trump Russia wasn't threatening nuclear war.
Under Trump gas was less than $2.00 a gallon.
Under Biden there is a threat to free speech.
“Show us the law, Inga. And I am not talking about the Electoral Count Act, which was passed after the fact.”
Trump’s actions, not words…
Conspiracy to nullify millions of votes of Americans by corrupt means, the fake voter scheme…
Count one: conspiracy to defraud the United States, a violation of 18 U.S.C 371
Count four: conspiracy against rights, a violation of 18 U.S.C. 241
———————————————-
Conspiracy to stop the vote certification by corrupt means…
Count two: conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, a violation of 18 U.S.C. 1512 (k)
Count three: obstruction of and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding, a violation of 18 U.S.C. 1512 (c)(2),2
Joe Biden has turned the FBI into his own personal goon squad, uses novel and far fetched interpretations of the law to throw his opponents in prison while maintaining an active effort to use these same bizarre interpretations of the law to seize the phones and files of his opponent’s lawyers and to have any lawyer who dares defend him disbarred, and he is the one who cares about the constitution.
You guys have twisted yourself into pretzels because you are the ones who have believed nonstop lies about Trump. You have been played by a man who is only in politics for what the power and money can do for him personally. The actual evidence for this is overwhelming and doesn’t depend on strange theories that are based on mind reading.
First rule of propaganda though, and not neglected by the Democrats, is to accuse your opponents of having your most glaring weaknesses, most people can’t recover perspective from the first lie, heavily repeated, to see the truth.
When do we have a "Night of the Long Knives," like the one back in '34? I mean, if Biden's cabal really wants to make sure they remain in power, couldn't they "take out" their opposition literally, instead of merely politically? Of course, since, "by all means necessary" would seem to include such an option, I wouldn't count it out if Trump manages to beat these indictments.
"then sic his attorney general on political adversaries..."
This is EXACTLY what I want him to do. I want the cornerstone of the next President's policy to be VENGEANCE, including the following:
-- Prison and loss of pension for all federal employees who have politicized their positions
-- Prison and loss of pension for all public school employees who are forcing the far-left socialist homosexual agenda on unsuspecting children
-- Prison and substantial fines for all university employees who continue to discriminate on the basis of race, and hire on the basis of left-wing ideology
-- Aggressive prosecution against companies, executives, and the ubiquitous idiots in HR who discriminate on the basis of race, including prison terms and substantial fines
-- A full-blown war on the fake-news media, including repeal of the Sullivan decision, and retroactive prosecutions against all of the proponents of fake-news for defamation and libel, resulting in prison sentences and substantial fines
-- Investigation of EVERY elected Democrat, including raids on their homes, and aggressive prosecution of every single crime -- no matter how small -- that is discovered
-- Exile and quarantine of all the mentally-ill people who promote gender interchangeability
The ONLY way we will return to a civilized, respectful society is if the bullies experience a level of pain that they can no longer bear. If things continue as they are, we are without a doubt headed towards civil war or secession. The only way for the nation to survive is to identify -- and then completely remove from the public sphere and civic function -- EVERY person who has been actively working to destroy the fabric of the country.
This thread started with Meade's cheeky remark about how Trumpies "love America." That's comical. That is only true if you equate Trump with America. Trump has no love for the Constitution, especially the First Amendment (recall: he is the one who wants to "open up the libel laws" so no one can criticize him) nor does he care much for the "rule of law."
The mere sniff that a candidate believe he is above the Constitution should be a dealbreaker. If Biden or Obama had made the statement that Trump, are you guys going to tell me you would be cool with it? "Termination" of the Constitution?! Trumpies wet their pants about people kneeling during the National Anthem but will say nothing (other than invoke Old Abe) when their Dear Leader suggests we "terminate" the Constitution.
Madness. Stupidity. You get the government you deserve. We live in Banana Republic for sure. I guess to his credit, Trump is at least HONEST about how he wants the US to be a banana republic and doesn't sneak around like the Dems. He tells you to your face on Truth Social.
Still, there are a few of us that don't want to live in a banana republic no matter who is in charge. I'm one of them.
You're delusional af. Now seethe about it.
"After nearly a decade of Trump convincing many in the public that all charges against him are politically motivated, he’s virtually inoculated himself..."
Democrats: "Look what you made me do."
It's not hard to convince people that clearly politically motivated actions are... well, politically motivated. Democrats really are garbage people.
Closer to the truth "We have spent the last decade watching the Leftist apparatchic's generate false charges against Trump to the point that we no longer believe anything any of them say".
"You might be able to take out your enemies, but when the tables turn, they are enabled and motivated to come after you. "
That's one of the Iron Laws. Me today, you tomorrow.
“Trump will not be the nominee. Establishment GOP hates Trump as much as Dems. At the convention a way will be found to exclude him. GOP folks know many Trump supporters will not vote for anyone else. They don't care who the next president is. Getting rid of Trump is all that matters. They don't call it the Uniparty for no reason.”
If it isn’t Trump, it will be DeSantis, who is making the right moves right now. He has basically said that if he is elected, he will gut the DOJ and FBI as being political weapons of the Democrats - and cites the prosecution of Trump by the DOJ as Evidence#1. The difference is that he has worked for the DOJ as a USA, and has shown that he can do political war with the bureaucracy and win. Best thing that Trump could do right now is to promise that he would make DeSantis his AG if elected.
I don’t see anyone else with any chance at the Republican nomination, or wining. They had their chance at coming out strong for Trump right now, and either waffled or just stayed quiet. Or, with Pence, attacked Trump.
"But Trump’s corrupt intent was clear: He was repeatedly told that the election was not stolen, and he knew..." After all this time, they really have no evidence on what Trump believed? That guy told him, and that guy, so he knows it! Trump listens real well.
I figured this must be true, since I've been asking people forever if there is any evidence on this central point.
"It is an egregious abuse of power to criminally prosecute someone for the purpose of educating the public and generating publicity for your political position."
True. However, once you find yourself being thus prosecuted, there's a lot to be said for using the resulting trials to educate the public about how, exactly, the election was stolen. Trump now has standing to present the evidence in court. This is gonna cost a lot. We'd all better send him some money.
We Americans value fairness immensely. It’s why we debate endlessly about election results. One side thinks the election was rigged and wanted it to be remedied, and the other side thinks the election was fair and there was an attempt to undo that. Both sides should be able to play vociferously in the debate without it becoming a criminal case. That will chill future debates about election results. Both sides should be able to use the processes in place to uncover the bulk of the truth. It’s a really dangerous game Biden et al are playing, no matter what side you’re on vis-à-vis 2020.
By the way, Vivek Ramaswamy’s reaction to these latest indictments is pure American grit. He really is a great candidate imho.
Ann Althouse claimed: "I'm a believer in freedom of speech and the rule of law."
I don't believe that and there is a LOT of evidence on this blog that you believe in neither of those things. We have no free speech in the United States. Did you pay ANY attention to what was happening with the government and their tech partners prior to the 2020 election?
You voted for Joe Biden knowing they were stopping free speech in the United States.
I also don't think you believe in the rule of law; the way you laud "progressive" courts taking over. You believe it's a good thing that the "progressives" in Wisconsin are again taking control of the state Supreme Court.
So sorry, but I'm not buying your argument. You need to explain yourself better if you expect me to believe that you are for free speech and the rule of law.
"In reality though, he's a billionaire. He doesn't need to go to the courthouse."
Tell that to Bernie Madoff. Delusional.
The only people whose lives were put at risk were the ones murdered by Nancy Pelosi's Praetorians in the Capitol Police.
Obviously we are being played to drive us to support Trump as the only way that they think that Biden can win, but sorry, if Mike Pence and Nikki Halley are the Republican Party, I would rather it be dead.
Not to mention that DeSantis folded to his donors in days. Fuck 'em all.
2. Should Trump be anywhere near the White House ever again: also no.
@D.D. Driver, who else, in either political party, would you trust to clean up the mess that is Bidenomics? Or are you one of the already very rich who is getting ever more more wealthy under Biden’s economic policies?
The GOPe might just be dumb enough and corrupt enough to do it anyway.
Exactly. Besides, every true conservative knows it is still Jeb Bush's turn!
Okay, I kid...there are a couple of next in lines waiting on the bench for when they get rid of Trump. Even the Washington Generals have players on the bench...
A tax is not a tax even when the President says it is a tax. Or something...
Why are all the indictments one way ? All Trump No Biden No Clinton. No Pelosi.
Very, very crazy to pursue an indictment like this -- even if it could be sustained in court, which remains to be seen.
In a DC court? You must be kidding.
gilbar said...
Jack Smith Admits Making False Claim to Court In Trump Case
Special Counsel Jack Smith’s team made a startling admission in its case against former President Donald Trump, acknowledging in a new court filing that it failed to turn over all evidence to Mr. Trump’s legal team as required by law while falsely claiming it had.
8/2/23, 11:27 AM
For this alone, the judge should throw out the case, severely sanction the prosecutors and notice the bar associations advising disbarment. It would also send a strong message to all prosecutors who play fast and loose without consequences. I didn't say dismiss with prejudice so if the DOJ still wants to proceed let them get clean prosecutors to review and refile instead of hacks.
Perhaps lawyers commenting here come reply if I am wrong but being indicted isn't reason enough to keep Trump the ballot for the party nomination or the general election. The same for being convicted. He could be tried and convicted but still be elected and he could do his time in the White House. It might come to that. Notwithstanding RINOs Trump at this point can win the nomination and the election. If the weakneed RINOs in Congress allow Trump to sink, in time they too will have their Democrat-Communist talk with the Lord which means do everything we demand or your next. The Democrats are playing using Stalin's rules and Stalin's rules are simple, Stalin always win.
"“”I can't think of a single thing more Un-American than suspending the Constitution because you don't get your way. And, I can't think a single thing more lawless than (ya know) "the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution."”"
So in your mind, just suspending some parts of the Constitution, say, preventing people from entering their houses of worship, because those in power could, is cool with you? Interesting. How about forcing grandma to die sans family in her locked down nursing home room? You cool with that too? Do tell. Do tell.
"If Joe Biden were smart, at some point he would say, "The evidence is compelling, but for the sake of the nation, I am prepared to grant a pardon to Trump if he wants it," "
Unfortunately for America, Joe "Cluster Bomb" Biden is no Gerald R. Ford.
""I know you are smarter than this."
That's a weird way to say "I disagree with you.""
It's called Damning with Faint Praise. An attempt to raise oneself up via the denigration of another. It's a Rules for Sociopaths thing.
"The media said things about George Floyd that made people riot - to the tune of billions in property damage."
I can't wait to see what police incident the media picks in 2024 to amplify. And I'm really curious which city they choose.
Trump has been far more respectful of the Constitution while president than his predecessor or successor. What D D Driver can't articulate is exactly what election laws Trump broke. After the 2000 election despite the Democrats braying there was an audit done of the ballots and indeed it proved Bush won. The fact that Democrats had to rig the game with ballot harvesting and only mail in ballots and fighting tooth and nail preventing audits of ballots is a dead giveaway they have committed election fraud. Electors can vote their conscious. These alleged J6 charges are frauds upon frauds. I will vote for Trump if convicted. I only hope that when he is elected he fires all the scum in the FBI and DOJ and replaces them with clean people from Red States. Then unleash the Wrath of God against every Democrat involved and every deep state scum as a caution to the rest. Hillary and Bill, Obama, Comey, Lynch, Holder and all the DOJ, FBI and IRS scum criminals. Also strip every former official who has a security clearance and investigate all of the intelligence agencies and of course the Bidens, father, brother and son for clear cut corruption. Too bad the Republicans in the House don't start impeachment proceedings against Biden and Garland and others.
"So in your mind, just suspending some parts of the Constitution, say, preventing people from entering their houses of worship, because those in power could, is cool with you? Interesting. How about forcing grandma to die sans family in her locked down nursing home room? You cool with that too? Do tell. Do tell."
No. Dipshit. It's wrong no matter who does it. I hate all traitor to the Constitution. Trump is one of them. Biden is one of them. Why is this SO HARD to understand? The Constitution is bigger than your stupid fucking partisan bullshit.
Calisse Tabarnac said...
"then sic his attorney general on political adversaries..."
This is EXACTLY what I want him to do. I want the cornerstone of the next President's policy to be VENGEANCE, including the following:
-- Prison and loss of pension for all federal employees who have politicized their positions
-- Prison and loss of pension for all public school employees who are forcing the far-left socialist homosexual agenda on unsuspecting children
-- Prison and substantial fines for all university employees who continue to discriminate on the basis of race, and hire on the basis of left-wing ideology
-- Aggressive prosecution against companies, executives, and the ubiquitous idiots in HR who discriminate on the basis of race, including prison terms and substantial fines
-- A full-blown war on the fake-news media, including repeal of the Sullivan decision, and retroactive prosecutions against all of the proponents of fake-news for defamation and libel, resulting in prison sentences and substantial fines
-- Investigation of EVERY elected Democrat, including raids on their homes, and aggressive prosecution of every single crime -- no matter how small -- that is discovered
-- Exile and quarantine of all the mentally-ill people who promote gender interchangeability
The ONLY way we will return to a civilized, respectful society is if the bullies experience a level of pain that they can no longer bear. If things continue as they are, we are without a doubt headed towards civil war or secession. The only way for the nation to survive is to identify -- and then completely remove from the public sphere and civic function -- EVERY person who has been actively working to destroy the fabric of the country.
8/2/23, 2:44 PM
THIS^^^^^
cubanbob said...
Perhaps lawyers commenting here come reply if I am wrong...
cubanbob you are not wrong. An indictment doesn't prevent Trump from running, legally. A conviction doesn't prevent him from being sworn in as President. Even incarceration wouldn't prevent Trump from taking the oath, per a strict reading of the Constitutional prerequisites for the Presidency. And then he could pardon himself, or try to, or more effectively appoint, uh, Jason Miller as his new AG. Or perhaps Rudy. And at that point end every one of the 1,100 or so J6 prosecutions.
But my reason for taking the time to write, cubanbob, is to remind you of the fantastically funny factoid that if Trump is convicted of a felony, he is then disqualified from voting in the one place he is registered to vote; the former slave state of Florida.
Big Mike said...
Purely coincidental:
1) US Treasuries downgraded from AAA to AA.
2) Devon Archer’s testimony on Capital Hill
3) Project Veritas announces proof that Ashley Biden’s diary is real, ergo Joe Biden did —inappropriately — shower with his daughter
And, purely coincidentally, …
4) U.S. v. Trump announced.
Aaaand... the House UFO hearings!
"That guy told him, and that guy, so he knows it!"
Democrats be like: "My best friend's sister's boyfriend's brother's girlfriend heard from this guy who knows this kid who's going with the girl who saw Trump foment insurrection last night. I guess it's pretty serious."
"The Constitution is bigger than your stupid fucking partisan bullshit."
I don't vote. Haven't for decades. Fool's errand. My point is that you said, "”I can't think of a single thing more Un-American than suspending the Constitution because you don't get your way."
You imply there are degrees of Un-American Constitutional suspension, with "because you don't get your way" at the top of your list. I was seeking more insight regarding your ranking system.
What comes in second? What comes in third? Is there a cut-oof at some point? If you could provide this list, no doubt we'd all benefit.
Even better, perhaps you have a newsletter to which we can subscribe. But I doubt there is a newsletter, or even a list, just the venting of your frustration in the comment section of a blog. "No. Dipshit" is the tell.
"The ONLY way we will return to a civilized, respectful society is if the bullies experience a level of pain that they can no longer bear. If things continue as they are, we are without a doubt headed towards civil war or secession. The only way for the nation to survive is to identify -- and then completely remove from the public sphere and civic function -- EVERY person who has been actively working to destroy the fabric of the country."
Worked for Mao.
As far as I have seen, I am the only one that reminds people that the Trump persecutions are the equivalent of 'heads on a pilke'. Warning all like minded outsiders they are going to meet a similar fate.
Rahmaswamy, and Burgum, are the two that come to mind. Both of whom I would consider...if Trump weren't in the race.
Christie is nuts, Pence and his statement about Trump, committed electoral suicide. The rest are JEB! clones
Inga said..
Conspiracy to stop the vote certification by corrupt means…"
Laughable. Inga. You are such an Microsoft NBC stooge.
"If Joe Biden were smart...'
You can stop right there.
But not our intrepid Chuckles, who goes on to claim:
"Biden would never pardon Trump, because the DoJ Office of the Pardon Attorney would never recommend it at any time at which Joe Biden is President (next six years)."
The reason the DoJ Office of the Pardon Attorney exists is that, as a practical matter, the President had too many things to attend to, to be able to dig into the minutiae of who should, and who should not, be given a presidential pardon. But even a loathsome disgusting fuckwit like Chuckles must concede that the authority to pardon comes from the president himself, not from some damned committee of convenience.
Calisse Tabarnac,
I don't see 'firing squad' anywhere in your list, so no.
Not that I think all the perps should depart in this manner-- I'm still holding out for Peter "FBI Lovebird" Strzok to be sentenced to blowing from a gun.
D.D. Driver said...
"So in your mind, just suspending some parts of the Constitution, say, preventing people from entering their houses of worship, because those in power could, is cool with you? Interesting. How about forcing grandma to die sans family in her locked down nursing home room? You cool with that too? Do tell. Do tell."
"No. Dipshit. It's wrong no matter who does it. I hate all traitor to the Constitution. Trump is one of them. Biden is one of them. Why is this SO HARD to understand? The Constitution is bigger than your stupid fucking partisan bullshit."
What part of our Constitution did Trump suspend? Is there an article you can cite?
Hey, maybe next time, if you believe a candidate is inherently corrupt, don't fabricate evidence to convict him at the beginning of his political career. Assume he will eventually hang himself. But you fools let Hillary and the FBI (with an assist from the NYT and Russia!) collude to frame a duly elected president of treason. And now everything after that, legit or no, is viewed by his base as fake. But hey, it has helped win subsequent elections, even if the side effect is destroying the American political ecosystem and converting the bleeping Bill of Rights into a partisan 'right wing' idea. So, you basically have one party supporting an incompetent and otherworldly egotistical autocrat (whose likely broke many laws) at the expense of a shed load of better options while the other party, which owns all the meaningful levers of power outside SCOTUS, finds new and improved ways to destroy our democracy in order to 'save it' (a democracy they proudly mention they don't even like!). We are so screwed. But you knew that already.
Post a Comment