"If Trump were to serve home confinement at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Palm Beach, Fla., New York authorities would likely have to work with counterparts in Florida to accommodate him, the experts said.... 'If you have a probation officer, you are not supposed to travel without permission. Your home is subject to random search because you don’t have a Fourth Amendment right to your home being private. You can get drug-tested, potentially. Travel outside the country is difficult,' said Matthew Galluzzo, another former prosecutor in the Manhattan district attorney’s office. 'That would be super awkward for someone on the campaign trail, but not impossible,' Galluzzo said. 'If he had to go to a debate against Biden, he probably could go, but you’re supposed to make that request far in advance.'... Merchan... could impose a financial penalty or require him to do community service or undergo counseling, some legal experts said. If the judge were to impose a more onerous penalty, such as home confinement, Trump could still find ways to continue campaigning, even if he were not on the road...."
Immobilizing a political opponent — have we ever seen anything like this in the United States? We will see how much this outrages Americans and turns people toward Trump. I know it outrages me. I have a strong emotional reaction. I feel as though I'm keeping a vigil for Trump today.
***
Bonus grammar question. For the purpose of this survey, ignore the issue of whether you would opt out of grammatical correctness in this case. That's an interesting issue, but don't let it affect your answer.
পোস্টগুলি
৭৪টি মন্তব্য:
If anything qualifies as a conspiracy to affect a federal election, the Democrats are it.
"Were Trump to be convicted . . . "
This is about as exciting as a gender reveal party.
"Immobilizing a political opponent — have we ever seen anything like this in the United States? We will see how much this outrages Americans and turns people toward Trump. I know it outrages me. I have a strong emotional reaction. I feel as though I'm keeping a vigil for Trump today."
If it's done this to Ann Althouse, I would imagine there are about 325,000,000 other Americans who are past the point of asking, Just who is creating the end of democracy?'
It's hard to fathom that these people- the left in general and Democrats specifically- do not see just how much damage they've done to both themselves and the country.
Trump's greatest crime was defeating Hillary Clinton while spending half as much money and getting fewer popular votes.
All while Biden's criminal activity as VP - gets a total pass.
End of democracy, indeed.
At some point the Supreme Court needs to stop this election interference masquerading as The Wheels of Justice.
I voted choice D.
Prosecutors: "Judge Merchan, we recommend that you impose strict travel requirements, and how would a Supreme Court appointment sound to you?"
Part of your mental illness is a delusion that everyone else is crazy like you are and paying attention to this farce.
You're probably not aware of the breathless and dramatic tone your statement makes.
You're acting like a teenage girl reading tiger beat and finding out that Justin Bieber is coming to town.
Blogger Temujin said...
If it's done this to Ann Althouse, I would imagine there are about 325,000,000 other Americans who are past the point of asking, Just who is creating the end of democracy
"It's hard to fathom that these people- the left in general and Democrats specifically- do not see just how much damage they've done to both themselves and the country."
I was just thinking the same thing, at least as regards damaging the country. I try and imagine what it's like to be in their head and I largely come up blank. It must be full of hate, but why? Do they need this to give themselves purpose?
I get enraged at those who outrage my dearly beloved wife.
Howard the Fool lobs one of his hand grenade comments at Althouse herself? No brains, that one.
Howard cannot fathom why anyone would be upset over his party's Soviet-style behavior.
LOL. Piss off, dude.
I guess Merchan denied a Trump motion for directed verdict? Haven't seen any reports. Did Merchan even offer a fig leaf of an explanation for his denial?
My prediction is Marchan will predicate any sentence on whether a Trump statement of contrition is forthcoming, in order to (1) essentially extend and expand the gag order if Trump does, or (2) attempt to shift blame for any severity of sentence on to Trump if he doesn't.
Immobilizing a political opponent — have we ever seen anything like this in the United States? We will see how much this outrages Americans and turns people toward Trump. I know it outrages me. I have a strong emotional reaction. I feel as though I'm keeping a vigil for Trump today.
Selling state secrets out of a bathroom at Mar-a-Lago. Have we ever seen anything like this? I agree he shouldn't be on trial for trying to conceal his sexual escapades when there are more serious things that need to be thoroughly investigated. Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were put to death for doing what he's suspected of doing.
"Immobilizing a political opponent — have we ever seen anything like this in the United States?"
Umm, no. Our progs are unique.
"I know it outrages me."
That's very nice, though a little late. Besides blogging, what are you going to do about it? Vow to oppose the outragers once and for all?
You know they hate you and all you stand for, abortion excepted. Will you hate them back?
It seems to me that choices one and four are essentially the same. In "if Trump were convicted," the "to be" in "if Trump were to be convicted" is essentially understood.
I don't know which is more dangerous: Immobilizing a political opponent or treating the immobilization as some trivial matter (looking at you Howard.) Fact of the matter is that either could damage "ma democracy" more than anything any Trump has done or been accused of doing. FAFO applies.
Both were's are correct but nobody young uses the subjunctive.
The subjunctive used to keep marital accusations civilized at least until one of the partners dropped into the indicative.
Nowadays it goes to immediate fights.
It's worth noting what wordsmith said...
Selling state secrets out of a bathroom at Mar-a-Lago. Have we ever seen anything like this? I agree he shouldn't be on trial for trying to conceal his sexual escapades when there are more serious things that need to be thoroughly investigated. Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were put to death for doing what he's suspected of doing.
Immediately change the subject from the actual kangaroo court trial that just took place to a hypothetical.
"Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were put to death for doing what he's suspected of doing."
I don't expect Trump to survive until November. I really don't.
Kafka says "what"?
It's got to be illegal to have your political opponent arrested on bogus charges, just to keep yourself in office.
Right?
What's insane is how they're not even hiding it.
"We'll arrest him and prosecute him for another crime. How are the polls doing?"
The correct elocution is "If (When?) Trump is wrongfully convicted in his hush money trial..."
Part of your mental illness is a delusion that everyone else is crazy like you are and paying attention to this farce says the guy who makes multiple comments on each and every Trump-related post on this blog.
Howard is paying attention to whether people are paying attention. If we're paying attention, we've got a problem. Move along now. Nothing to see here. We're just putting the GOP nominee for President in jail or confining him to his home until after the election. Everything is really normal, just the legal system doing its perfectly normal thing, buzzing away dutifully.
What really enraging is I have no idea what specific law Trump was supposed to have violated. Its all made up. And the Leftwing democrat Judge has made it clear he hates Trump and is using the Trial to punish him. Its Demcrat party "lawfare".
We basically have a NYC judge/jury deciding whether the Republican party can run a campaign for President and offer Trump as an alternative to Biden. What 350 million Americans want doesn't matter. Its as if an Arkansas judge/jury had arrested Clinton and Hillary and put them on trial in June 1992 to help Bush get re-elected.
But again, this is only happening because the Republican Establishment silently supports it. If they were fighting back and making a stink the D's would never have done this. People like Johnson, McConnell, Bush, Romney, the R's in NY state, do have a certain amount of power. But they say nothing or support the show trial. Bush hasnt uttered a peep has he? I thought he was all about "Protecting the office of the President and power of the Executive" but guess not. Seems like it all an act, he just cared about George Bush.
Joe Biden, for whom it was a federal crime to possess classified documents stacked "em up in his garage and in a chinese paid for office to sell influence to the tune of about $20,000,000.00 dollars and some mouth breathing imbecile brings up Mara-Lago. lol.
All the attempted gag orders are particularly obscene.
This is all about silencing him and stopping him.
Democrats who don't believe in democracy.
(See also kicking RFK Jr. out of the Democrat primary)
There can be no opposition!
If Joe Biden finds himself prosecuted for corruption and receiving kickbacks...
I will have zero sympathy.
"Were" implies impossibility, like "if I were a man."
Anyway, the third one is the most correct and least inelegant.
Selling state secrets out of a bathroom at Mar-a-Lago. Have we ever seen anything like this? I agree he shouldn't be on trial for trying to conceal his sexual escapades when there are more serious things that need to be thoroughly investigated. Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were put to death for doing what he's suspected of doing.
5/29/24, 8:33 AM
You mean what the Biden family actually did??
If you're not paying attention to the work that Taibbi, Shellenberger, Weiss, and the rest are doing to expose this Administration's efforts to absolutely control public discourse, control voting registration and balloting procedures - and punish 'wrong-think' that exposes these activities - then you don't understand just how far they think they can go.
We all can see that the current campaign against Donald Trump is unprecedented in American History. And there have been some pretty bad times, evil behavior, in some of the campaigns in the 1800s. Those have been eclipsed now, by the raw power that is held by the - what to call them? They're much more than just censors. Sure, they're censoring and controlling the flow of information. But they are also watching, for the first time in history, what you are looking at and what you are saying, electronically. They are fully capable of tracking your behavior, your purchases, your movements, if they so choose, and they can do it without any bothersome warrant-seeking. Why? Because they can, mate - because they can. If you are wondering how it's possible that a Presidential Candidate and former US President can be treated in these kinds of ways - it's because they can.
I guessed on the grammar, since its not my strong suit. My reasoning was: we're talking about a future event and its singular so I went with "is".
I believe the last option is the grammatically correct one, but I think it's too formal and would probably feel more natural with the third option.
The first option, the one used in the WaPo headline, is not good at all. It's neither grammatical nor natural. The second option is the worst.
If TRUMP is on the ballot and wins the election, Joe BIDEN doesn't become president again just because TRUMP is incarcerated. Trump's VP may end up as president but Joe BIDEN won't. I know people who still think Hillary could have been appointed president if Trump had been removed after the 2016 election.
Given the lawfare and Trump's overall age and health, the VP candidate on the Republican ticket may be the most important question in this election.
So, if TRUMP was not able to serve for whatever reason, who would people be willing to 'live with' in order to maintain our 'democracy'.
I am still hopeful Mitch Daniels could be convinced but doubtful. He appears smart enough to walk away and have a personal life. TOM Cotton is in second place at the moment.
Biden can join a long list of luminaries. Somoza. Duvalier. Pinochet. Stalin.
All rulers who imprisoned their political opponents via a corrupt Judiciary. And the Journalists in those countries all looked the other way.
I get enraged at those who outrage my dearly beloved wife.
Good man.
We're just putting the GOP nominee for President in jail or confining him to his home until after the election.
For an unknown crime.
Trump should simply ignore any ruling from the case. Don't step foot in NY again, or at least NYC. What are they going to do? Hunt him down in Florida?
"I feel as though I'm keeping a vigil for Trump today."
I have felt as though I'm keeping a vigil for America since 2020. One lonely, flickering candle.
I believe the last option is the grammatically correct one, but I think it's too formal and would probably feel more natural with the third option.
I opted for number three due to the subject verb agreement. Trump is / Trump Were
I voted for "If Trump is convicted" because that is how I would write it, but I think #1 and #4 are also completely correct, too. Only #2 sounds incorrect to me. Part of why I chose #3 is that I expect the conviction to come within the next day or so- it the expectation of the event were further out in time, lets say next week, then I would opt for #1.
This isn't based on any actual knowledge of the rules involved which I will now go read about, just on what sound right to my ear.
Blogger Ann Althouse said...
Move along now. Nothing to see here.
This is the exact mistake Americans made with the 2020 voter fraud. It's also the main reason why we are here today, wondering if our corrupt gov't is going to hold Trump as a political prisoner.
The 2024 election is about righting the fraudulent 2020 ship. Now, I don't believe anymore that America's problems can be solved at the ballot box. But maybe it buys some time.
To fix America, you have to fire everyone working in the liberal education establishment. They, more than anyone, are the reason for our decline.
"Trump should simply ignore any ruling from the case. Don't step foot in NY again, or at least NYC. What are they going to do? Hunt him down in Florida?"
I was wondering the same thing. Would they have the balls to arrest him at a campaign rally in Arizona or Wisconsin?
So, Trump is either convicted or he is not convicted. The conditional, conviction, needs to happen for what penalties he receives to occur. So, "If Trump should be convicted" seems most appropriate, which isn't one of the options.
The American "democracy" ended long ago. I'd say it ended with the JFK assassination. We've been playing make believe ever since. Our gov't took down Nixon after he won 49 states and 60% of the popular vote in 1972. Our gov't used COVID to set up absentee voter fraud in 2020, to take down President to actually won the 2016 election by all the constitutional rules.
Maybe now...with the trials...Americans are waking up and realizing we have been living a lie for sixty years. Voter fraud is rampant. It is the ONLY reason to oppose voter ID.
This isn't a vigil for Trump, it's a vigil for the America many thought existed their entire lives.
It's all been bullshit except for the US hockey team beating the USSR in 1980.
I have been wondering at the extreme reaction to Trump. Three basic scenarios occur to me:
1. That he won against the Annointed One, and therefore was an enemy because he was supposed to fall on his sword, and therefore is a traitor (or at least a traitor because he was one of them but then opposed them)
2. The Democrats are so stupid that they don't realize that if you treat Trump like a friend he will champion our causes.
3. Trump can't be controlled and there is too much graft and corruption at stake to allow him to be in power.
It has to be these options because he isn't actually anything that they claim him to be, but they cannot admit the real reason they oppose him.
I wrote it the other day- Howard is actually feeling embarrassment about what is happening, but hopes others can be convinced it is a mere trifle to not be concerned about. He is the guy walking down the street with a ridiculous toupee hoping no one realizes he is bald.
For the love of god, dry your tears, lady.
There was a long process, many checkpoints.
If Cheeto Mussolini committed a crime(s) and is found guilty in court, he should face the consequences, like any other person would have to.
The sense of victimhood is strong with you people. I have to imagine that if Barrack Obama were facing a verdict, MAGAt dipshits and their sympathetic brethren would have the same sense of outrage.
“ It's all been bullshit except for the US hockey team beating the USSR in 1980. ”
And let’s not forget Greg LeMond thrice winning the Tour de France.
Blogger RoseAnne said...
If TRUMP is on the ballot and wins the election, Joe BIDEN doesn't become president again just because TRUMP is incarcerated.
Even if incarcerated, wouldn't PEDJT still be president? There is nothing that says the swearing in has to take place in DC. Trump could be sworn in from his jail cell.
Would the 25th amendment come into play? Unable to do his job because he is in jail. But doesn't that require a majority of the cabinet? He will not have appointed one.
Impeachment? Perhaps, but that will take weeks or months.
I agree that the VP is important. So did Vivek just take himself out of the running for VP or any other post?
Yesterday he announced that he owns almost 9% of Buzzfeed. That makes him the biggest owner and he says he will continue to buy more. He is asking for 3 seats on the board.
Sounds like he will have his hands full in the coming years.
OTOH, how hard can it be? Musk runs the much bigger Twitter and in his spare time runs Tesla, SpaceX, Boring Co, Starlink, Neuralink and perhaps some other stuff.
John Henry
“Selling state secrets out of a bathroom at Mar-a-Lago. Have we ever seen anything like this? I agree he shouldn't be on trial for trying to conceal his sexual escapades when there are more serious things that need to be thoroughly investigated. Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were put to death for doing what he's suspected of doing”
Ha! Ha! Ha!
Yesterday the lead DOJ prosecutor in the FL case was slapped down by Judge Cannon for filing a motion when she had told them not to, not consulting with opposing counsel, and doing it at 5:30 pm right before Memorial Day weekend. What seemed to fly under everyone’s radar was that the offending DOJ prosecutor was Jay Bratt - the guy who put the entire investigation together from the first, by grossly misusing the judicial system, as well as his power as branch chief of the DOJ’s Counterintelligence and Export Control Branch.
Every week that goes by, new dirt comes out about how abusive his political prosecution of Trump has been, from the start. In the last couple weeks, we have found out that the real grand jury was the DC one, and the case was only brought to Cannon’s ED FL district a couple weeks before indictment, already wrapped up. And, Bratt was hiding that, and the DC transcripts from the defendants. Also, that well after the DC investigation was underway, several pallets of boxes were shipped from NARA to MAL (by the GSA) by order of NARA (which had been ordered to fully cooperate with the FBI/DOJ/Bratt by the FJB WH). Which is to say that NARA/FBI/DOJ/Bratt were probably the only ones who knew what was in those pallets of boxes before the MAL raid, where they were reseized by the FBI/DOJ/Bratt. Talking about mishandling evidence, turns out the record of where documents marked as classified were found had been corrupted. Talking about the raid itself, we also found out that the FBI had authorization to use deadly force against Trump and his Secret Service detail, apparently because of knives in the kitchen there. Moreover, they were only authorized to search for documents marked as classified, yet seized some 100k items in the raid, apparently including Trump’s will, and took hundreds of photos of Melania’s and Barton’s quarters, which they weren’t authorized to even enter (and, of course, didn’t find any documents in either marked as classified). All in the last several weeks.
No wonder Judge Cannon is threatening to sanction Bratt, and why he is so desperately trying to get her thrown off the case. I suspect that even if they succeeded in replacing Cannon with a Marchan type ED FL judge, it would be too late to save the case. One attorney who has litigated cases involving classified documents has opined that they would be lucky to get to trial in 2025. 2026 might be more realistic. Bratt was trying to slip a lot of stuff by the judge and defendants by classifying it and with secrecy orders, in order to get to trial in March. Or even May. Cannon has opened a lot of it up to the public, and it isn’t pretty.
Blogger TeaBagHag said...
If Cheeto Mussolini committed a crime(s)
Nobody else, here, in the courtroom or elsewhere I have seen has been able to tell me what crime he is alleged to have committed.
Sounds like you know. Could you share that with us? The specific crime with NY Code # 2ould be very helpful.
If you won't do that, then fuck off.
John Henry
I've read a bit about Henry VIII, and Biden is no Henry VIII. Maybe there's a hope that he'll be remembered for establishing a new religion, more or less trying to help victims while creating some new ones.
I voted for the last option, but I'm not convinced (convicted?) of it. Perhaps like Yancey, I think of the Subjunctive case as used for something less imminently possible. Not something we're just waiting to determine.
What's interesting, is that if you swap out "convicted" for "found guilty" I'm a hard number three. "If Trump is found guilty" over "If trump were to be found guilty".
“Impeachment? Perhaps, but that will take weeks or months.”
Oh, that would be fun. If Trump wins the election, that means that he beat the margin of fraud. Absent ballot fraud in 2020 and 2022, the Republicans would probably have a half dozen more Senate seats, and they are likely to pick up some this time around too (e.g. AZ, WV, GA), giving them control of the Senate, and it’s likely that they will have, regardless, decently strong control of the House too. Which means that such an Impeachment investigation would likely involve investigating DOJ/FBI and NYC judicial abuses, with, of course criminal referrals to the DOJ.
Howard said...
"This is about as exciting as a gender reveal party."
We just assumed you were a guy. Sorry.
Explains a lot though.
"We just assumed you were a guy. Sorry.
Explains a lot though."
Howard is so fat he hasn't seen his penis without a mirror in the last 30 years.
The Demo Party needs to be severely punished nationwide in this election, or the center will not hold.
I had a theory they've overreacted to Trump for 8 years because they were forced to support another womanizing vulgarian in '98 to avoid giving their enemies a victory, but that was a long time ago.
"If Trump were guilty" seems like a better use of the subjunctive mood. We'll soon know for a fact if he's convicted or not, so the definitive "is" is better, Clintonian "is" or not.
I believe the last option is the grammatically correct one
And that was the exact question, so, I got it right. Along with about a third of the other voters last time I looked.
Bonus Grammer Question.
There was a test? Noody said there was going to be a test! Oh, shit.
I chose option 3 as the most clear, and found myself with the plurality. That was hours ago, and now option 4 has edged to the front.
For reasons I don't understand.
Simplicity enhances clarity. "If Trump is..." both is shortest and most clear.
Ann Althouse said...
"...We're just putting the GOP nominee for President in jail or confining him to his home until after the election..."
Oh, to be a fly on the wall in this jury room. I wonder how many of the jurors actually realize the bigger picture on this and can put their personal feelings for Trump aside?
I do suspect that many of them are still confused about just what they are supposed to decide.
And just when you thought that things couldn't get any more confusing, Jonathan Turley posted this up on X today:
"...Merchan just delivered the coup de grace instruction. He said that there is no need to agree on what occurred. They can disagree on what the crime was among the three choices. Thus, this means that they could split 4-4-4 and he will still treat them as unanimous..."
Fuck the communist dems.
#1 just assumes that the "to be" is understood.
#2 is flat wrong - "was" is past tense, and he was not convicted (yet).
#3 is OK in a headline, conversation, or other informal usage.
#4 is grammatically correct.
You would correctly use “were” for the singular Trump in the subjunctive, which must be clearly contrafactual. This sentence is not contrafactual. It is merely conditional, not subjunctive. Number 3 is correct.
Some confusion arises because "were" is the plural indicative form of "was" - I was, we were - in addition to the subjunctive. That's English for you.
Immobilizing a political opponent? Eugene Debs was the perennial Socialist candidate for president, starting in 1900. Routinely got around 2-3% of the popular vote. Opposed US entry in WW1 - got convicted of sedition - ran in 1920 from the Atlanta fed pen, and still got over 3%.
JSM
I remember right before the Panama invasion, Noriega declared himself the winner of the latest presidential election.
The actual winner’s running mate (ie, the real Panamanian VP) was out trying to protest, and was beaten bloody by Noriega street activists.
That’s what’s being done to Trump. Remember, he’s not just the current GOP candidate. He is the current President.
https://go.photoshelter.com/photographers/blog/he-said-excuse-me-and-then-proceeded-to-beat-the-vice-president/
JSM
Meade said...
"I get enraged at those who outrage my dearly beloved wife."
In my defense it isn't intentional.
Just don't show up on stoep and punch me in the face. At least not until I've had coffee.
একটি মন্তব্য পোস্ট করুন