Let’s dispense with the obvious. If Trump committed a crime, he should be punished for it.
But “no one is above the law” doesn’t justify going after Trump harder than they would normally do with someone else. E.g., if a particular crime is usually not prosecuted, it should not be prosecuted in Trump’s case simply to make a point. Unless this is a crime that should be prosecuted more, and a high-status case will send a message.
I don’t think that’s the case here.
Also, if a crime is usually not prosecuted, they should either start prosecuting it or take it off the books. Having lots of crimes that are prosecutable at someone’s discretion is not a good thing.
I’m only discussing broad issues because I don’t know the specifics, and it wouldn’t matter if I did. The specifics don’t matter. This case is not a matter of equal justice, or any of the bumper-sticker slogans people use to describe it. It’s two things: a political battle, and a chance for someone to make a name for himself.
If we were to appeal to general principles, I would say you don’t arrest a former president unless you have a very strong case, and my understanding is that this is not a very strong case. But general principles really don’t matter here, and anyone who says differently is being naive.
My prediction is that he will not be arrested. I don’t think the left wants to turn Trump into even more of a martyr than Trump already encourages himself.
Agree this isn’t the strongest case. Nor is it the most important of the potential cases. Interference with an election is far more significant and the evidence against Trump in the Georgia case is rather compelling as he is heard on a taped phone call of asking the Secretary of State to “find” additional votes. That ‘s the case that should be persued.
I’m tempted to think that our system is simply incapable of doing anything straight anymore. We vacillate between hyper-partisan efforts on both sides. It’s hard to even imagine a venue in which Trump could be investigated fairly.
To my knowledge no government official has indicated that Trump would be arrested. What we know is due to Trump’s social media commentary. To date, Trump hasn’t been a very reliable source. I’m still waiting for him to release the raw footage validating his intimation that the FBI planted documents at Mar-a-lago. As well, as other unfounded claims made by him. But, I digress.
QUOTE: We vacillate between hyper-partisan efforts on both sides. It’s hard to even imagine a venue in which Trump could be investigated fairly.
Wouldn’t this go for any major political figure such as Hillary Clinton, Hunter Biden or Joe Biden? Would any of them get treated fairly?
So, what happens if Trump or any of these other people are suspected of crimes with credible evidence available? Do we not investigate because the landscape is too hyper partisan?
It seemed with Hillary, there was very little discussion of fairness…mostly it was “lock her up” before a full investigation could be conducted…even without charges being filed. Yet, with Trump it seems there’s an allowance for his behavior. Ironically, it seems the “law and order” president has many issues with the law.
Whatever the case, Trump or anyone…there needs to be consistency if are going to credibility say that we governed by the rule of law.
What Trump did is very similar to John Edwards: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Edwards#Indictment_and_trial
And the fact that Trump’s lawyer Cohen has already served time for what we expect Trump to be charged with…brings to mind two tiers of justice. It’s funny… Trump hangs around and hires all these shady people and people don’t think Trump is shady.
McCarthy says he wants equal justice under the law. If so, given Cohen was tried and convicted…why wouldn’t Trump be investigated and possibly charged (if the evidence warrants it)? Isn’t that equal justice? Was it prosecutorial overreach when the Trump justice department convicted Cohen?
Time will tell, but so far, this seems to be another Trump political stunt.
I believe one of the problems with the case against Trump is that the statute of limitations has expired.
If the statute of limitations is expired, that will give Trump’s defense an immediate go-to in getting the case thrown out without further ado. Highly unlikely that they are to stupid to overlook that.
*too stupid
Of course one might try to construe the whole thing as a grand consipiracy Qanon style. But that’s for crazy people.
From what has been reported, it expires near the end of the year. So, there is allegedly time.
Yet notice, all the noise about this case is coming from Trump and Republicans. I’m still waiting to hear “IF” there will be an indictment, and if so, on what facts.
It’s likely best to wait and see what happens. Is this a case at all? If so, on what merits. If there politics driving this, it seems Trump is the one behind the wheel thus far. We’ll see.
Let’s see if there are going to be charges. All we know is orange bozo saying there will be. Sometimes statute of limitations get extended if after the fact–if the perp does some action to cover up evidence of the original crime…and then that can sometimes extend the SoL. Say, the SoL is 7 years for an offense and we are now 8 years after an offense… If the defendant did something 3 years ago to cover the offense, then it’s sometimes possible to bundle the offense and the coverup altogether and the original SoL gets extended. Don’t know what or if it would apply here…because we don’t even know what the d@*# charges are or if there are any.
TRUMP QUOTE: “…THE FAR & AWAY LEADING REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE & FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, WILL BE ARRESTED ON TUESDAY OF NEXT WEEK. PROTEST, TAKE OUR NATION BACK!”
It’s Tuesday…has Trump has been arrested yet???
This article seems to codify what is currently known. It suggests this might be another one of Trump’s political stunts.
https://www.npr.org/2023/03/21/1164823276/what-trumps-arrest-claim-says-about-his-hold-on-politics-and-the-2024-election
This strategy isn’t new for Trump. Here’s how it works: Post something provocative. Generate attention and headlines. Use said headlines to raise money. Pound the table. Trigger liberals. Send the right into a protective rage. Rinse. Repeat.
It’s the kind of thing he did previously as a candidate and as president whenever something bad was likely to happen — be it the Access Hollywood tape, the Mueller investigation, two impeachments, the election he lost, Jan. 6 or the search of his Florida home that turned up boxes of unreported classified documents.
In the 48 hours after that search, Trump’s team raised more than $2 million. Since Saturday, there have been at least a dozen fundraising emails sent out in Trump’s name about his impending “arrest” (plus about half a dozen more trying to shape the narrative).
Ironically, NOTHING untoward has occurred to date and you have leading Republicans speaking out in defense of Trump. It appears law enforcement is operating within appropriate legal protocol. Yet, those that “say” they uphold the rule of law are the ones speaking out against law enforcement. Imagine that?!?!
Lastly, one of the unintended consequences of this seeming “stunt” is that it’s costing real “money” in preparing for protests. If this turns out to be “fake news”, ISTM that Trump should be liable for prep costs for the protest “he” called for. Maybe he could use some of the funds from his current “fundraising” efforts.
Heaven forbid that a politician tries a stunt. What is the world coming to?
Trump lies all the time. The difference between his lies and Biden’s lies is that Trump knows he’s lying. I don’t know if that’s better or worse.
Trump knows he lies??? Really??? How do you know?
I suspect Biden (and many politicians) lie. No surprise there. Yet, has it been established factually that Biden is unaware of when he lies? Is there a credible source that has verified that?
If Biden is lying, he knows that he is lying. He could indeed be making false statements without knowing it, but this wouldn’t be lying. You could say that in such a case he is mistaken or even delusional, but not a liar.
Kevin McCarthy and his merry band of congressional investigators (Jim Jordan, Jim Comer, Bryan Steil) have issued a letter to Manhattan DA, Alvin Bragg making demands relative to his office’s investigation of Trump. What’s interesting is the feds are attempting to interject themselves in a “state” case in which they have no jurisdiction. Aren’t these the same people that frequently promulgate the notion of “states’ rights”? A spokesperson for Bragg’s office responded: “We will not be intimidated by attempts to undermine the justice process, nor will we let baseless accusations deter us from fairly applying the law.”.
So, let me see if I get this….there has been no official announcement of an intent to charge Trump…only an investigation and congressional house members are seeking to interfere in the lawful administration of justice? Aren’t these people suppose to be the advocates for “law and order”??? Just to think that all of this “seems” to be predicated on a social media post from Trump (who is known to lie all the time).
Some legal experts indicate the House Republicans actions may be grounds for opening a criminal investigation relative to obstruction of justice. It’s highly doubtful this would occur. Yet, it’s still interesting that those who are investigating the “weaponization of law enforcement”could be investigated for potential criminal activity within that domain. You just can’t make this stuff up!
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/manhattan-da-issues-scathing-response-gop-letter-possible-trump-indictment-we-will-not-be-intimidated
It’s Thursday…has Trump been arrested yet? According to reporting, the grand jury won’t be discussing the case today. They typically don’t meet on Fridays. Maybe Trump meant next Tuesday? We’ll see.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ny-grand-jury-not-expected-consider-trump-case-thursday-source-says
The longer this continues it seems to confirm this was another “fundraising” stunt by Trump. Some reports have him collecting 1.5 million so far from supporters. It’s interesting to see people give their hard-earned money based on an unsubstantiated story from a guy that is known to lie all the time.
What’s truly unfortunate is the wasted tax-payer money in preparing for protests (which Trump called for). As well, the alleged uptick in violent threats based on Trump’s social media commentary. Also, the wasted cycles from the media incessantly reporting on a story that might just wind up being a “hoax”.
Yes, I don’t understand why this created so much reaction when there was literally no source for it other than Trump. I understand the rabid Trump fans falling for it, but why didn’t everyone else just say, “Um, according to who?”
Did get a lot of publicity and a lot of rubes gave their hard earned money to a billionaire.
QUOTE: I understand the rabid Trump fans falling for it, but why didn’t everyone else just say, “Um, according to who?”
I “suspect” the media fell for it because it’s easy money…likes, clicks and views. I “suspect” the police did so because the last time Trump made a social media call like this the J6 Capital Riot happened. Fool me once…you know the rest.
Albeit they should know better, I think I understand their motivation. Yet, what’s interesting is Republican leaders went all in on defense of Trump…based on a social media post. House congressional members are potentially on the edge of unlawful activity in their defense. You’d think they’d verify before attempting to use their authority especially since they are investigating alleged government abuse of power. Not a good look for the investigators to be potentially culpable of the very thing they are investigating.
“Your letter treads into territory very clearly reserved to the states. It suggests that Congress’s investigation is being ‘conducted solely for the personal aggrandizement of the investigators or to “punish” those investigated,’ and is, therefore, ‘indefensible,’” he writes, pointing to a 1957 Supreme Court ruling limiting congressional investigations.
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/3914256-bragg-fights-gop-effort-to-force-his-testimony-on-trump-probe/