Try Trump at the Ballot Box, Not in Court

[Rumpole]

Last week, responding to Damon Linker’s persuasive arguments about the dangers of criminally prosecuting Trump, I ventured that we might have to sacrifice justice on the altar of prudence. The column provoked a fierce backlash, and while it may seem odd to say this, I’m in sympathy with my critics, and offer these reflections in all modesty. I may be wrong. Perhaps the right path is to pursue justice “though the Heavens fall.” But we cannot pretend that there is no risk to this path. In fact, the stakes could not be higher—the stability of our society—so it’s worth considering all of the possible outcomes before barreling forward.

The prosecute-and-be-damned party believes fervently that any hesitation to hold Trump criminally liable for his crimes amounts to appeasement and cowardly submission to what Michelle Goldberg calls “the insurrectionists’ veto.” Acknowledging that some on the right are “heavily armed” and speaking “lustily of civil war,” she objects that “The far right is constantly threatening violence if it doesn’t get its way. Does anyone truly believe that giving in to its blackmail will make it less aggressive?”

It’s a great point. The very worst part about refraining from prosecuting Trump is that it would seem to be a victory for bullying and intimidation. I concede that, and it burns. When Trump riles up his mobs and then threatens to unleash them on his opponents, one’s natural reaction is unprintable (by me anyway). It is precisely when he acts like a Mafia don or a fascist that the urge to slap him down with every available weapon is strongest.

Try Trump at the Ballot Box, Not in Court

Trials are too uncertain to risk the republic.

www.thebulwark.com

One can hardly imagine a greater indictment of the POT than essentially saying, "if the overwhelming evidence of Trump's guilt is not enough to secure a conviction, or even if it is, prosecution is a dangerous endeavor because it would become a circus-like spectacle. Don would take advantage of it in ways that would be damaging to the republic and cause his cult to rally behind him." IOW, The Following is too Crazy to risk it. So let the criminal go free?

The rebuttal. To Charge or Not to Charge

The man is a threat to US National Security, and a demagogue, and history has shown how clever demagogues destroy their country, though insidiously popular at the outset. No demagogue should ever be allowed to hold any office of public trust. Democrats will do everything in our power, via legal means, to keep this man from running, and out of office, for the good of the country. We believe glossing over his many crimes would be, in the long run, worse that risking his becoming emboldened if he is prosecuted and the prosecutors lose, which is a distinct possibility. The risk MUST be taken. You wouldn't put a referendum vote on the ballot to remove the crime of murder from the code book, would you? There are some things that the public should not be allowed to vote on. After all, they gave Palestine in Gaza the vote, and who did they vote for? Hamas. I rest my case. This man must be indicted, and if the facts prove it, convicted and put away. I believe the facts are there, in spades, for his conviction.

 

[hadit]

No, no, NO!! The man is a threat to US National Security, and a demagogue, and history has shown how clever demagogues destroy their country, though insidiously popular at the outset. No demagogue should ever be allowed to hold any office of public trust. Democrats will do everything in our power, via legal means, to keep this man from running, and out of office, for the good of the country. You wouldn't put a referendum vote on the ballot to remove the crime of murder from the code book, would you? There are some things that the public should not be allowed to vote on. After all, they gave Palestine in Gaza the vote, and who did they vote for? Hamas. I rest my case.

Translation: I want to the power to decide what you are allowed to vote on. Everything else is decided by me.

 

[konradv]

Don't ever underestimate the average liberal democrat's (but I repeat myself) ability to flip out and resort to violence.

 

[Stann]

And which of those trails is going to cost him his Secret Service detail and result in him going to prison? Campaign finance issues won't do it.

trump has left many trails, one will get him there. Even presidents and x-presidents are not above the law. Security service details won't be necessary in a high security prison. It would be redundant and just about as useless, possibly even as harmful as he was and still is.

 

[Stann]

Translation: I want to the power to decide what you are allowed to vote on. Everything else is decided by me.

At this point only fools would vote for trump.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

The rancid democrats are afraid of the vote.

 

[marvin martian]

Fuck that. If he broke the law, get him. Get all of them.

That's the problem, though, our "justice system" doesn't go after all of them, just the ones who threaten the leftist elites.

 

[Stann]

At this point only fools would vote for trump.

No, I looked it up again. There are several answers. " As Time Goes By " , " Citizen Came " and " The Godfather " all came up, but not your suggestion. It would seem you are doing what you're accusing me of As for the multiple listings, that's easily explainable. Like everything else trump can't make up his small mind.

 

[Stann]

That's the problem, though, our "justice system" doesn't go after all of them, just the ones who threaten the leftist elites.

Criminals affect all of US, far more than you could ever realize. It costs everyone's bottom line. And it's standing there right in plain sight.

 

[Stann]

The rancid democrats are afraid of the vote.

You really want him to lose a third time ? This one might kill him. Democrats are not afraid of him at all. Common sense and caution are excellent concepts when dealing with venomous snakes like trump. If he dies, he dies; it'll be on your hands.

 

[hadit]

trump has left many trails, one will get him there. Even presidents and x-presidents are not above the law. Security service details won't be necessary in a high security prison. It would be redundant and just about as useless, possibly even as harmful as he was and still is.

I'm sorry, but I think you're hopelessly naive for two reasons:

1. To think that a prisoner is safe in a high security prison is ludicrous on its face.
2. TRUMP! has been charged with nothing, and I repeat, nothing, that could possibly result in a sentence in a high security prison.

 

[hadit]

At this point only fools would vote for trump.

Translation: I don't understand other people who don't irrationally and permanently hate TRUMP! with every fiber of their beings, so I'm going to call them names in hopes that they'll feel bad and stuff.

 

[Stann]

I'm sorry, but I think you're hopelessly naive for two reasons:

1. To think that a prisoner is safe in a high security prison is ludicrous on its face.
2. TRUMP! has been charged with nothing, and I repeat, nothing, that could possibly result in a sentence in a high security prison.

No one is above the law. No one is safe in prison. People usually get what they deserve in life.

 

[Stann]

Translation: I don't understand other people who don't irrationally and permanently hate TRUMP! with every fiber of their beings, so I'm going to call them names in hopes that they'll feel bad and stuff.

There's absolutely nothing to like about a narcissistic megalomaniac. No one should feel shamed for telling the truth.

 

[hadit]

No one is above the law. No one is safe in prison. People usually get what they deserve in life.

And TRUMP! has done nothing that will put him in prison.

 

[hadit]

There's absolutely nothing to like about a narcissistic megalomaniac. No one should feel shamed for telling the truth.

I don't think you could name a presidential candidate since Jimmy Carter who wasn't a "narcissistic megalomaniac" to one degree or another. It goes with the job description. I mean, who in their right mind would submit to the unrelenting anal exam conducted by a hostile press and opposition party, complete in the last 6 years with ongoing efforts to not only destroy a president politically but personally?

 

[Stann]

And TRUMP! has done nothing that will put him in prison.

And I totally disagree with you. He has always been a criminal and now he has made himself a threat to our national security.

 

[hadit]

And I totally disagree with you. He has always been a criminal and now he has made himself a threat to our national security.

But you can't name a crime he committed and has been convicted of that would put him in prison. Nor can you name a crime he's been charged with that would put him in prison. You say he should be in prison simply because you want him there, not for anything he's actually guilty of doing.

 

[john doe 101]

Translation: I don't understand other people who don't irrationally and permanently hate TRUMP! with every fiber of their beings, so I'm going to call them names in hopes that they'll feel bad and stuff.

There is nothing to understand. Trump is a morally bankrupt piece of shit and anyone that supports him is the same. End of story.

 

[hadit]

There is nothing to understand. Trump is a morally bankrupt piece of shit and anyone that supports him is the same. End of story.

Translation: I continue to be frustrated that I can't force everyone else to hate TRUMP! and his millions of supporters with a visceral, irrational hatred that claws at our insides day in and day out and can only be quenched by his total personal destruction.