There is now, and has been for many, months, a mountain of criminal evidence as to Trump's clear intention of overthrowing our democratically elected government.
So when does Attorney General Merrick Garland and the entire Department of Justice plan to INDICT Trump? When does "the rule of law," so fundamentally important in our democracy…
There is now, and has been for many, months, a mountain of criminal evidence as to Trump's clear intention of overthrowing our democratically elected government.
So when does Attorney General Merrick Garland and the entire Department of Justice plan to INDICT Trump? When does "the rule of law," so fundamentally important in our democracy, begin to get the attention it deserves?
“Ahead of former President Donald Trump’s return to Georgia, legal experts with the Brookings Institution think tank published a detailed analysis Friday of the potential criminal investigation he faces in Fulton County linked to his outspoken efforts to overturn the state’s election results.
The 107-page report, written by seven legal analysts, concludes that Trump’s post-election conduct leaves him at “substantial risk of possible state charges predicated on multiple crimes.” It was published a day before Trump is set to hold a rally in Perry to promote a slate of state Republican candidates.“
Good question. It's these little bits of behavior (or lack of behavior) that portend the final results. On the positive side I am heartened by the results of the AZ 'fraudit'.
The law is at a disadvantage here, since it can only pursue misdeeds after they have been performed. To control plotters, it is necessary to insert informants among their ranks. This second round is more dangerous than the first because those who are willing to switch sides are identified in the first round and expelled from the movement. That innoculates the top echelons of the movement against informants. And to make things worse, the drift in boundaries occurs in the open, so erosion of the rule of law is not in itself chargeable even under racketeering laws.
To answer your question more directly: We're following the process to call these guys to account. Trump is a master of running out the clock, and a long-time practitioner of loyalty testing.
To put a little finer point conspiracy only requires an overt act toward the criminal action so a charge can still be brought without the completion of the misdeed.
Trump was impeached for these crimes. Republicans let him off, because they saw that exonerating Trump would tighten their hold on power, while convicting him would only be honoring their oath to the Constitution and following the rule of law.
Emergency for whom? Republicans would reframe it thusly, “Can you believe that we’re getting away with this? Pretty soon we’ll control everything! Trump sure taught us a lot.”
When? We have to see if the 1/6/21 Committee will be a tempest in a teapot result like the Mueller or both Trump Impeachment’s. This time could be different with no “Unitary President” and gangster in charge.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Garland state that the gutted department doesn't currently have enough lawyers to open and prosecute all the possible cases ... yet. They are on a hiring spree at the DOJ. And they are also probably making sure the people they hire are ethical along with the usual needed qualities. I'm feeling quite positive and do want everyone to continue to treat this - and react to all of this - like the hair on fire issue it is. We must leave no stones unturned ourselves. In the meantime (while we're waiting for the new legal recruits to get hired, go through familiarizing themselves with the job, etc.) the House Select Committee for the January 6 investigation will continue to roll out their evidence. The states of New York and Georgia and so on will continue their own pressures, and we can make sure that those responsible for fair district line drawing are held to account to not politically gerrymander. One more thing: I think the information about the oligarchs around the world has made the greedy faces of the scum among us light up. In the case of Trump, he isn't as smart as McConnell and McConnell probably thinks he can always be one step ahead of the charismatic Trump and add to his hordes of ill-gotten gains before he dies of old age. In the meantime, he will do everything he can to make sure no laws change that will threaten his and his family's generational wealth. I'm fairly certain he is already drooling over the landmarks and statues which will bear his name going forward once he's officially an oligarch in the new United States autocracy. Just saying. I could be wrong.
You are far from wrong. The primary thrust of what we see played out as “politics” or culture wars are fundamentally outcomes of the primary goal of simply enabling billionaires to constantly horde and protect endless wealth.
Effectively this is the same behavior and economic model that is feudalism.
Now I understand how it is perhaps the difficult to consider ourselves as peasants, but if you remove the complexity of technology one begins to see that vast swaths of the populace are not subject to the will and control of powerful oligarchs (the new Lords in the Neo Feudal Model)
I'm no expert, but have heard that he can, indeed, be prosecuted for in-office criminal activity. He couldn't be prosecuted as a sitting president, but that changed on January 20.
Nancy, you’re right that some legal scholars think Trump can now be prosecuted for crimes committed while in office. And at least as many scholars argue he cannot. There are two other factors involved here. One is proving that some of Trump’s many transgressions are indeed crimes. There’s an ongoing, unresolved debate about this. Which is not to say that Trump was not corrupt, and amoral. Clearly he was. It’s just that the bar of proving criminal intent is very high. The other issue is whether or not it’s the right thing to do politically. Prosecuting ex-presidents sets a dangerous precedent. It’s routinely done in autocracies, do we want that here? Imagine how millions of MAGAts will respond.
The Constitution is flawed. Our rule of law is full of holes, which the rich and powerful exploit. And our political system is stretched to the breaking point. Trump wants to break it.
JR, you're correct on all of your points. In my opinion, TFG is getting lots of advice, as he'd have no grasp of the nuances required to dance on the edge without consequence. Immorality and corruption are not usually criminal offenses, and I agree that it would be a very slippery slope to prosecute an ex-president. We've learned that there are few guardrails during this unprecedented timespan. Maybe we can shore up the rule of law and the Constitution, thus repairing the guardrails.
As an alternative to these thorny predicaments, maybe we'll be comforted if the SDNY, E. Jean Carroll, and the others manage to punish him for his civilian crimes, and avoid further mucking up of our government.
You may be right but planning a coup may fall into a different category. They can prosecute everyone around him and we'll just have to see what "falls out" as far taking him out of circulation. He's involved enough sedition now to make his White House years moot. There sure are a lot of good people around looking at and working every angle. I'm hopeful.
There is now, and has been for many, months, a mountain of criminal evidence as to Trump's clear intention of overthrowing our democratically elected government.
So when does Attorney General Merrick Garland and the entire Department of Justice plan to INDICT Trump? When does "the rule of law," so fundamentally important in our democracy, begin to get the attention it deserves?
What are we waiting for ?
One can always hope.
https://www.ajc.com/politics/lawyers-trump-faces-substantial-legal-risk-in-georgia-criminal-case/UDERBJCBJJAOHKQSTWQN6Z7EZI/
“Ahead of former President Donald Trump’s return to Georgia, legal experts with the Brookings Institution think tank published a detailed analysis Friday of the potential criminal investigation he faces in Fulton County linked to his outspoken efforts to overturn the state’s election results.
The 107-page report, written by seven legal analysts, concludes that Trump’s post-election conduct leaves him at “substantial risk of possible state charges predicated on multiple crimes.” It was published a day before Trump is set to hold a rally in Perry to promote a slate of state Republican candidates.“
Wouldn't it be the most delicious, satisfying scenario if Fani Willis, a WOMAN OF COLOR, brought this miscreant to his knees? Talk about irony!
But will the GA state attorney have the guts to charge him?
Good question. It's these little bits of behavior (or lack of behavior) that portend the final results. On the positive side I am heartened by the results of the AZ 'fraudit'.
Thanks for posting the link, H.A. I've downloaded the report.
The law is at a disadvantage here, since it can only pursue misdeeds after they have been performed. To control plotters, it is necessary to insert informants among their ranks. This second round is more dangerous than the first because those who are willing to switch sides are identified in the first round and expelled from the movement. That innoculates the top echelons of the movement against informants. And to make things worse, the drift in boundaries occurs in the open, so erosion of the rule of law is not in itself chargeable even under racketeering laws.
To answer your question more directly: We're following the process to call these guys to account. Trump is a master of running out the clock, and a long-time practitioner of loyalty testing.
The wait is excruciating.
To put a little finer point conspiracy only requires an overt act toward the criminal action so a charge can still be brought without the completion of the misdeed.
Trump was impeached for these crimes. Republicans let him off, because they saw that exonerating Trump would tighten their hold on power, while convicting him would only be honoring their oath to the Constitution and following the rule of law.
Yet, here we are.
I think you meant, “as a result, here we are”.
Yes
As Dr. Richardson said: "If this is not a hair-on-fire, screaming emergency, what is?"
Emergency for whom? Republicans would reframe it thusly, “Can you believe that we’re getting away with this? Pretty soon we’ll control everything! Trump sure taught us a lot.”
Trump will fly thru like he has his whole life. Honestly I think he has the mob threatening those who would bring him down.
When? We have to see if the 1/6/21 Committee will be a tempest in a teapot result like the Mueller or both Trump Impeachment’s. This time could be different with no “Unitary President” and gangster in charge.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Garland state that the gutted department doesn't currently have enough lawyers to open and prosecute all the possible cases ... yet. They are on a hiring spree at the DOJ. And they are also probably making sure the people they hire are ethical along with the usual needed qualities. I'm feeling quite positive and do want everyone to continue to treat this - and react to all of this - like the hair on fire issue it is. We must leave no stones unturned ourselves. In the meantime (while we're waiting for the new legal recruits to get hired, go through familiarizing themselves with the job, etc.) the House Select Committee for the January 6 investigation will continue to roll out their evidence. The states of New York and Georgia and so on will continue their own pressures, and we can make sure that those responsible for fair district line drawing are held to account to not politically gerrymander. One more thing: I think the information about the oligarchs around the world has made the greedy faces of the scum among us light up. In the case of Trump, he isn't as smart as McConnell and McConnell probably thinks he can always be one step ahead of the charismatic Trump and add to his hordes of ill-gotten gains before he dies of old age. In the meantime, he will do everything he can to make sure no laws change that will threaten his and his family's generational wealth. I'm fairly certain he is already drooling over the landmarks and statues which will bear his name going forward once he's officially an oligarch in the new United States autocracy. Just saying. I could be wrong.
You are far from wrong. The primary thrust of what we see played out as “politics” or culture wars are fundamentally outcomes of the primary goal of simply enabling billionaires to constantly horde and protect endless wealth.
Effectively this is the same behavior and economic model that is feudalism.
Now I understand how it is perhaps the difficult to consider ourselves as peasants, but if you remove the complexity of technology one begins to see that vast swaths of the populace are not subject to the will and control of powerful oligarchs (the new Lords in the Neo Feudal Model)
I don’t think DOJ can prosecute Trump for things he did while president.
I'm no expert, but have heard that he can, indeed, be prosecuted for in-office criminal activity. He couldn't be prosecuted as a sitting president, but that changed on January 20.
If you’re up for a long read, here’s an excellent article on Trump’s many transgressions, and the legal issues involved. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/17/magazine/trump-investigations-criminal-prosecutions.html?
Thanks, JR. I'll open this link this afternoon.
Nancy, you’re right that some legal scholars think Trump can now be prosecuted for crimes committed while in office. And at least as many scholars argue he cannot. There are two other factors involved here. One is proving that some of Trump’s many transgressions are indeed crimes. There’s an ongoing, unresolved debate about this. Which is not to say that Trump was not corrupt, and amoral. Clearly he was. It’s just that the bar of proving criminal intent is very high. The other issue is whether or not it’s the right thing to do politically. Prosecuting ex-presidents sets a dangerous precedent. It’s routinely done in autocracies, do we want that here? Imagine how millions of MAGAts will respond.
The Constitution is flawed. Our rule of law is full of holes, which the rich and powerful exploit. And our political system is stretched to the breaking point. Trump wants to break it.
JR, you're correct on all of your points. In my opinion, TFG is getting lots of advice, as he'd have no grasp of the nuances required to dance on the edge without consequence. Immorality and corruption are not usually criminal offenses, and I agree that it would be a very slippery slope to prosecute an ex-president. We've learned that there are few guardrails during this unprecedented timespan. Maybe we can shore up the rule of law and the Constitution, thus repairing the guardrails.
As an alternative to these thorny predicaments, maybe we'll be comforted if the SDNY, E. Jean Carroll, and the others manage to punish him for his civilian crimes, and avoid further mucking up of our government.
You may be right but planning a coup may fall into a different category. They can prosecute everyone around him and we'll just have to see what "falls out" as far taking him out of circulation. He's involved enough sedition now to make his White House years moot. There sure are a lot of good people around looking at and working every angle. I'm hopeful.