Ex President* Trump

[O Really]

Maybe he could take an Alford plea. He would admit that the government has enough evidence to convict him but not admit to "doing anything wrong."

[O Really]

I can't think of any instance, other than bona fide cult leaders like Manson and Jones, certainly no politicians, who have been able to maintain such blind loyalty no matter what the do - and even acting against the interests of the followers. Political favor is more often fleeting, and can be lost quickly. Remember Bush the Elder getting bashed and ultimately losing primarily over a broken campaign promise of 'read my lips." Nixon's support went down to 20-something percent after Watergate, from 68% approval at the start of his second term. There were originally the usual comments about "political play" and general support but by the time the trials were over, something like 60% thought he was, yes, "a crook". Many examples in non-presidential jobs exist - in politics and elsewhere - where support and popularity hang on a string and can be cut over one incident. So if you liked the music published as "Milli Vanilli", what made it different when you found out the cover boys were not the singers? Nothing, but M-V became pariahs overnight. Long time Cracker Barrel fans (probably including a lot of trumpers) are now shunning it over multi-colored chairs.

And yet, Trump keeps shooting people on Madison Avenue and his fans keep fooling themselves and keep wearing the MAGA. Even more strange than Stockholm Syndrome.

[O Really]

Driving up the mountain toward Julian and then on the the desert, there's a place close to Ramona with a truly unfortunate name. The place has been there for decades, family owned, Apparently no intention of changing the business name, and who knows - they may like it even more now.

Spoiler:

[Vrede too]

I can't think of any instance, other than bona fide cult leaders like Manson and Jones, certainly no politicians, who have been able to maintain such blind loyalty no matter what the do - and even acting against the interests of the followers....

And yet, Trump keeps shooting people on Madison Avenue and his fans keep fooling themselves and keep wearing the MAGA. Even more strange than Stockholm Syndrome.

It's a mystery.

His casinos were failures.
His dealings with contractors have largely been fraudulent.
His "University" was fraudulent.
His charities were fraudulent.
His "election" was fraudulent, relying on campaign finance felonies and criminal Russian meddling.
His economic claims were fraudulent.
"his company has been found guilty of 17 counts of tax fraud and other crimes"
He pushes a Big Lie that has been rejected by all courts.
He got hundreds of worshipers sentenced to thousands of years in prison (note: damn, I like typing that).
He's a convicted sexual abuser and defamer.
And:

Indictment Brings Trump Story Full Circle

There was a time, not that long ago really, when Donald Trump said he cared about the sanctity of classified information. That, of course, was when his opponent was accused of jeopardizing it and it was a useful political weapon for Trump.

Throughout 2016, he castigated Hillary Clinton for using a private email server instead of a secure government one. “I’m going to enforce all laws concerning the protection of classified information,” he declared. “No one will be above the law.” Clinton’s cavalier handling of the sensitive information, he said, “disqualifies her from the presidency.”

Seven years later, Trump faces criminal charges for endangering national security by taking classified documents when he left the White House and refusing to return all of them even after being subpoenaed. Even in the what-goes-around-comes-around department of American politics, it is rather remarkable that the issue that helped propel Trump to the White House in the first place now threatens to ruin his chances of getting back there.

The indictment handed up by a federal grand jury at the request of special counsel Jack Smith effectively brings the Trump story full circle. “Lock her up,” the crowds at his campaign rallies chanted with his encouragement. Now he may be the one locked up if convicted on any of the (thirty)seven reported counts that include conspiracy to obstruct justice and willful retention of documents....

He disclosed highly classified information to Russian officials visiting him in the Oval Office. He posted sensitive satellite imagery of Iran online. He kept using an unsecured mobile phone even after being told it was monitored by Russian and Chinese intelligence agencies. He tore up official documents and threw them to the floor once he was done with them despite laws requiring that they be saved and cataloged, leaving aides to collect the ripped-up pieces and tape them back together....

Trump will be booked as an accused criminal and, absent an unforeseen development, ultimately will be judged by a jury of his peers.

What a difference seven years makes.

Lock him up!

[O Really]

Y'know, it doesn't seem all that unusual for high ranking officials to get a bit sloppy in following rules protecting secret information. And even Trump, excessively "sloppy" though he was, could be ignored for his in-office transgressions. Security overall would have been tight at Mar a Lago, so even boxes in the shower might not have been in any real danger. But after he left office? And after the subpoenas? Outrageous.

[Vrede too]

Y'know, it doesn't seem all that unusual for high ranking officials to get a bit sloppy in following rules protecting secret information. And even Trump, excessively "sloppy" though he was, could be ignored for his in-office transgressions. Security overall would have been tight at Mar a Lago, so even boxes in the shower might not have been in any real danger. But after he left office? And after the subpoenas? Outrageous.

And after the incessant 2016 whining about Clinton? Hillaryous.

Traitors:
Trump's GOP defenders in Congress leap into action on charges after months of preparation

SINO McCarthy
Molester-abettor Jim Jordan
Rep. Nancy Mace of South Carolina
Teddy Cruz
Even terrorism:

Arizona Rep. Andy Biggs was more strident. “We have now reached a war phase,” he tweeted. “Eye for an eye.”

[GoCubsGo]

The great orator is still in fine form.

[Vrede too]

The great orator is still in fine form.

https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1667622291050573829

That's adorable that he actually believes that an EO can negate the 14th Amendment and that his bigoted Trumpettes swallow it.

[O Really]

The great orator is still in fine form.

https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1667622291050573829

That's adorable that he actually believes that an EO can negate the 14th Amendment and that his bigoted Trumpettes swallow it.

Not much ambiguity in that, is there?

"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."

[GoCubsGo]

Haven't we all learned by now the constitution means whatever trump says it means?

[Vrede too]

The great orator is still in fine form.

https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1667622291050573829

That's adorable that he actually believes that an EO can negate the 14th Amendment and that his bigoted Trumpettes swallow it.

Not much ambiguity in that, is there?

"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."

I'm sure that it's not the only part of the 14th Amendment that he and the Cult .45 would like to do away with.

[Vrede too]

It looks like he got his bent judge.

So you think they've got Trump right where they want him, eh? Wait till you hear what this former federal prosecutor turned high-end defense attorney has to say

... one former federal prosecutor turned high-end defense attorney, Ken White, sees a quick path out of trouble for Trump.

He said all Trump needs is a judge completely in the tank for him — a judge who is willing to sacrifice their reputation in order to protect him.

White thinks Trump might get one: Judge Aileen Cannon....

In addition to being a fancy defense lawyer, White also co-hosts a legal podcast with Josh Barro called "Serious Trouble."

Reflecting on Cannon's ruling to appoint an independent arbiter (called a "special master") and other decisions she made handling the government's investigation into Trump's handling of classified documents, Barro mentioned to White on the podcast that Cannon has shown a "willingness to behave in a way that most judges likely would not, even if they were partisan Republicans."

"Sure," White replied. "She's willing to violate the Meat Loaf Rule: I'll do anything for love. But I won't do that."

That would be funny under different circumstances.

... sometimes," White said, "Judges just don't give a shit and Judge Cannon's behavior in this case in the past was several very long strides in this direction of don't give a shit."

White suspects Cannon may be imagining what she might be able to get out of a second Trump presidency.

"You have a situation where it is not even remotely difficult to imagine: Her acquitting Trump, Trump getting elected, Trump elevating her to the 11th Circuit or the Supreme Court. He would totally do it. His fans would be completely fine with it. And it would be just a giant middle finger to the country. And I mean, he would do it."

So how, exactly, could Cannon protect Trump and end this case against him in a moment? ...

And Cannon could go even further than that, White said.

"Most drastically, she can do things that can't be repaired. Once a jury is impaneled, she can dismiss the case. And there's not a goddamn thing anyone can do about it. Double Jeopardy attaches; you're done. She can grant a motion for directed verdict of acquittal after the government's case. And then we're done. You can't be retried, can't be reviewed. It's over." ...

[Vrede too]

I don't want to live in a country where Trump could be held accountable

[O Really]

I don't think Loose Cannon will keep the case.

[GoCubsGo]

I don't think Loose Cannon will keep the case.

I hope and think you are right.

She's certainly shown no ability to be impartial. Hard to believe she could start now but the arraignment will be a big indicator.

Do you know what would happen if trump's lawyers ask for a dismissal and she grants it? Is that even possible during an arraignment?

Isn't part the arraignment to show probable cause? What if she says nyet?

[O Really]

I don't think Loose Cannon will keep the case.

I hope and think you are right.

She's certainly shown no ability to be impartial. Hard to believe she could start now but the arraignment will be a big indicator.

Do you know what would happen if trump's lawyers ask for a dismissal and she grants it? Is that even possible during an arraignment?

Isn't part the arraignment to show probable cause? What if she says nyet?

You never know what a rogue loose Cannon might do or try, but generally a judge can't dismiss at arraignment. Prosecutors could drop charges, but we know they're not going to. Could be dropped if a plea agreement is reached, which we also know nagonnahappen. But sure, eventually they'll file for dismissal when they pretend that prosecution hasn't shown sufficient evidence for trial.

[GoCubsGo]

I don't think Loose Cannon will keep the case.

I hope and think you are right.

She's certainly shown no ability to be impartial. Hard to believe she could start now but the arraignment will be a big indicator.

Do you know what would happen if trump's lawyers ask for a dismissal and she grants it? Is that even possible during an arraignment?

Isn't part the arraignment to show probable cause? What if she says nyet?

But sure, eventually they'll file for dismissal when they pretend that prosecution hasn't shown sufficient evidence for trial.

That was a given, just wondering if it could be done and possibly granted on Tuesday.

[GoCubsGo]

Honestly think it was meant to be "deterred" but he changed it.

Tuesday will beg to differ.

‘I will never be detained’: Trump defiant in first speech since federal indictment

[billy.pilgrim]

Honestly think it was meant to be "deterred" but he changed it.

Tuesday will beg to differ.

‘I will never be detained’: Trump defiant in first speech since federal indictment

I believe it

[GoCubsGo]

You never know what a rogue loose Cannon might do or try, but generally a judge can't dismiss at arraignment. Prosecutors could drop charges, but we know they're not going to. Could be dropped if a plea agreement is reached, which we also know nagonnahappen. But sure, eventually they'll file for dismissal when they pretend that prosecution hasn't shown sufficient evidence for trial.

She could really muck this thing up and given her history I bet she tries.

Hope she's removed quickly.

How the Florida judge overseeing Trump's trial could hobble the Justice Department's case