Kurt, Trump's opponents had little to gain from making false or exaggerated claims about Trump possibly breaking US laws—-whether those claims concerned US campaign laws (Russia and Zelensky phone call) or US election laws or lawful transition of power.
There is a diehard core of Trump supporters who don't think for themselves when it comes to Trump. They will dismiss undeniable evidence of Trump's malfeasance (Raffensperger phone call, Zelensky call, creation of slate of alternate electors, incitement of Jan. 6 riot and his refusal to stop it) as Fake News. Or normal exercise of dirty politics. Or no big deal because Trump is upending a rigged election.
Those people aren't going to abandon or drift from Trump.
The Democrats don't investigate Trump for their own political gain. If you think that, you're an idiot pretending to be an informed sophisticate. Dem voters get more involved when they think their opponents are cheating but you don't win elections with investigations.
In each case of the investigations into Trump, there was significant evidence of criminal or illegal activity by Trump or the people around him. You cannot let that kind of behavior slide or just shrug it off. And Trump has shown that if he thinks he can get away with illegal behavior, he'll behave that way again or do worse things.
You keep stating that if we don't enforce our immigration laws and borders, we have no country. If we don't investigate when a presidential candidate or president breaks laws and tries to overthrow a free and fair election, we don't have a constitutional republic.
I doubt that the search of MAL was just about any old classified documents that Trump was hanging onto. The DOJ and FBI likely received strong evidence that Trump still had documents relating to Jan. 6. Someone like Mark Meadows or Pat Cipollone tipped them off.
This isn't about humiliating or smearing Trump. That does no political good. This is about investigating the potentially criminal activity of a man who's bent and broken laws all his life.
Jan. 6 and Trump's other attempts to overthrow the 2020 election make Watergate look like shoplifting candy. We almost lost our democracy. You need to acknowledge that.
That's right, federal laws are irrelevant here. The Constitution? Why it's just a piece of paper.
you're missing my point.
I will just add the following, before leaving this dreaded space.
I never implied a law wasn't broken,
but that it doesn't matter to the trumpsters,
who will latch onto the political barrage brought on by the left,
with their own political barrage, which will further bolster chubby.
his supporters are some of the most loyal and also the most attacked as a whole by the establishment driving them even closer together.
And that's why he won. He panders to you and all of the oppressed, downtrodden, good people of America who are being marginalized by some evil, leftist group that wants to replace you with immigrants and take away your guns. He says all the things that get you warm and fuzzy inside.... but he doesn't mean any of it.
The people who are "out to get him" see him for the selfish, bad guy he is. You don't care.
He is guilty of the crimes he was impeached for, but saved by his party and the people he appointed. You don't care.
He did NOTHING while a mob damaged the capital and attacked the police. You don't care.
He took classified documents that he knew he shouldn't...who knows why. You don't care.
The only thing you care about is that he says what concerns you. Whether you're selfish or racist or angry or lonely...he tells you he loves you. You can't get enough.
What most in the "establishment" are betting on is that the folks in the middle and many on the right don't want to live in the past, and compliment the Emporer on his new clothes. The January 6 committee has detailed without question that Trump knew he lost, yet played to his crowd so he didn't have to admit one very painful reality. As the incumbent President, during the "greatest economy the world has ever seen"...he lost to an old man with limited charisma and questionable cognitive abilities. Biden was a bad candidate... and even with all of his advantages, Trump lost.
Now he wants to put people in places to ignore the results if necessary of the 2024 election. You say you're patriotic.... but you don't care if he destroys our country so you can feel good about yourself again...as a winner... regardless of the facts.
"This is no time for complacency. We have to seize this opportunity to deal with the radical left socialist lunatic fascists. We have to hit them very, very hard. It has to be a crippling defeat."
No doubt "centrists" are tickled and ready to give him another chance...
It's tempting to let him slip away - but then he's an unwitting Keyser Soze, getting away with his non-prosecuted-because-let's-move-on crimes. What a terrible injustice to America, and it's not at all the GOP way of doing things (see also, her emails).
This isn't about hate. Now it's about atonement. Everyone could see that he was doing things wrong (see my list, that doesn't seem to shrink). The GOP, though, wanted so badly to own the libs that they turned a blind eye - after strongly denouncing him before the election! The hypocrisy of them supporting him afterward is mind-blowing. What that means is that his wrongs are legit, but the GOP is complicit in letting them happen - and now it's disingenuous to say "oh, it's the distant past..."
There's surely some anger involved - but it's the same anger as LOCK HER UP and searching for pedophiles in the pizza place basement. It's just that this time, he's actually guilty of the things he did.
All the formal law enforcement actions directed at Trump, be it the FBI raid or the January 6th Committee are seen as 100% partisan and political by the vast majority of his supporters. These actions are having the affect of galvanizing support for Trump rather than diminishing it, which is no doubt opposite of which is wanted by the Committee, the DNC, Biden and you all.
You all would have been better served as someone here mentioned, by simply ignoring him and letting him slip away into irrelevance. Instead you all are feeding the monster (which you all created) the attention he craves, keeping him on the front page and in everyone's head and providing his supporters with reasons to come to his aid and support.
The real problem here is that the democrats cannot function on issues alone and need a bad guy to beat up on in order to keep themselves in power. This is the wrong bad guy because A) he can and will fight back and B) his supporters are some of the most loyal and also the most attacked as a whole by the establishment driving them even closer together.
I can tell you this much ... up until the January 6th hearings began, his support was waning and people were looking for other options. Since the hearings, that has reversed with them being seen as 100% partisan with everyone on the committee having previously voted to impeach him. And now the FBI raid. It has caused more problems of credibility for the FBI and the DOJ instead of hurting Trump.
But keep on ignoring the points I am trying to make about the unintended consequences of you and your party's actions and keep on wondering why Trump's support is waxing instead of waning ... These current actions are what is making him a martyr, which is the last thing you all should want. But you all hate him so much, you just cannot help yourselves from doing it.
I wanted to see what Rachel Maddow had to say about it and, sadly, it was the same old stuff that led me to stop watching her: she led with the four or five things that he could have done wrong (which one could it be? Suspense!) and that grand juries have been convened for, and then finally said it was the last one (she knew before she began her litany so what was the point of the list?) and then began to discuss it with the journalist who had brought the story to the forefront back in February.
But, by leading with the four or five things she charged the story with how bad Trump is, which is what her audience wants to hear. I think Rachel is extremely smart and very well spoken, but sheâs an entertainer after all and has to fill the time and draw eyeballs.
going back to another poster a few days ago re. the "over blown" media coverage on all things trump, it's this type of entertainment news that dilutes the effectiveness of the arguments against chubby, and gives the entertainment news from the other end an angle to counter.
We don't need all the hyperbole to attack all that is wrong with Trump.
Yep. It's like the "it's all politics!" defense. Of course it's politics. Of course it's brought up by his opponents - would his allies bring it up?
Of course they're "after" him. Anyone who respects the USA should be:
He flaunted his ignorance of his position, impugned anyone who disagreed with his perspective, no matter how inaccurate.
Hired his children to the White House.
Shook hands with bad guys; alienated our allies.
Encouraged violence against dissenters and refused to repudiate violent American gangs.
Stole confidential/classified documents and took them to his private residence. Not treasonous, but certainly reprehensible.
And repeatedly - repeatedly - spreads distrust of the American Government by asserting that it's inherently dishonest. (Yes, there's always been some of that, but he takes it to the level of "do what I say because everyone else is untrustworthy, and send me money.")
So, a "martyr"? Hardly. Those folks are innocent victims to a great cause. He's not innocent, and the overthrow of the government is not - last I checked - a great cause.
And now the people that want to take him to task, all of them, are missing the point, right?: he's a great leader, a visionary, and the laws don't apply and BTW we should send him money.
as far as i can tell, with the jan 6th stuff there just isn't enough meat to make the indictable ham sandwich
Beg to differ. The toughest charge to bring and drive home would be seditious conspiracy. I think the House Committee alone has shown enough to prove that Trump knowingly planned the crowd to storm the Capitol building on Jan. 6 and disrupt the formal Electoral count.
The evidence for other potential charges is overwhelming. I'm no lawyer but that it strikes me that the phone call with Raffensperger on its own is enough to put Trump in jail.
Let's remember that most of the people publicly testifying before the Committee are Republicans. Let's also remember that the current head of the FBI is a Trump appointee. And also that there's a high bar of evidence to clear before a judge will approve a federal search warrant.
Martyr? Trump brought all this on himself.
Unfortunately this doesn't matter.
It's all politics, not Dateline NBC
as far as i can tell, with the jan 6th stuff there just isn't enough meat to make the indictable ham sandwich
Beg to differ. The toughest charge to bring and drive home would be seditious conspiracy. I think the House Committee alone has shown enough to prove that Trump knowingly planned the crowd to storm the Capitol building on Jan. 6 and disrupt the formal Electoral count.
The evidence for other potential charges is overwhelming. I'm no lawyer but that it strikes me that the phone call with Raffensperger on its own is enough to put Trump in jail.
Let's remember that most of the people publicly testifying before the Committee are Republicans. Let's also remember that the current head of the FBI is a Trump appointee. And also that there's a high bar of evidence to clear before a judge will approve a federal search warrant.
I wanted to see what Rachel Maddow had to say about it and, sadly, it was the same old stuff that led me to stop watching her: she led with the four or five things that he could have done wrong (which one could it be? Suspense!) and that grand juries have been convened for, and then finally said it was the last one (she knew before she began her litany so what was the point of the list?) and then began to discuss it with the journalist who had brought the story to the forefront back in February.
But, by leading with the four or five things she charged the story with how bad Trump is, which is what her audience wants to hear. I think Rachel is extremely smart and very well spoken, but sheâs an entertainer after all and has to fill the time and draw eyeballs.
i tend to agree, everyone is concerned with ratings/advertising dollars, so they probably slant/bias toward that direction
regarding trump, i just don't have the time too glean the mass media, so i just do not know enough to say with any authority
which leads me to rely on a few well versed scholars and try to draw from that "venn diagram"
(haven't looked at their stuff in a couple of weeks)
as far as i can tell, with the jan 6th stuff there just isn't enough meat to make the indictable ham sandwich
they seem to indicate that the georgia vote issue is legally the best shot at getting something to stick
sam harris had a guy, on his podcast, david french, and apparently this guy has legit conservative cred and a principled approach to critiquing all things trump
people should listen to it if time allows
i also think kurt is correct that the constant croasting of trump may have some martyr effect
regards
edit: and why didn't anyone laugh at my make-up crack below? jeez!
most Americans were left wondering which crime they were going after him for.
I wanted to see what Rachel Maddow had to say about it and, sadly, it was the same old stuff that led me to stop watching her: she led with the four or five things that he could have done wrong (which one could it be? Suspense!) and that grand juries have been convened for, and then finally said it was the last one (she knew before she began her litany so what was the point of the list?) and then began to discuss it with the journalist who had brought the story to the forefront back in February.
But, by leading with the four or five things she charged the story with how bad Trump is, which is what her audience wants to hear. I think Rachel is extremely smart and very well spoken, but sheâs an entertainer after all and has to fill the time and draw eyeballs.
Of course in this case the guy leading the 'deep state' was appointed by the donald himself. More astonishing to me is that the FBI raided the home of the former president. And for most of the day, until further reporting came out, most Americans were left wondering which crime they were going after him for.
So... apparently the FBI still believes he is holding onto classified documents that he didn't ultimately provide with the last batch that he did turn over that may incriminate him (probably with respect to Jan 6th). There is still culpability on his part if he is holding onto classified documents that he was requested to turn over... regardless of what those documents contain. To do so would be to arrogantly disregard the law. So for those shouting "unfair" or "witch-hunt" the current situation would not exist if Trump had simply done what he was supposed to do. Or better said... not done what he did. The thing that interests me is whether the extent of his lawlessness & arrogance is such that he was still sitting on incriminating documents that he had an opportunity to destroy or even tear up and "flush" ;) We will see but my initial opinion leans to the answer being "Yes".
Of course in this case the guy leading the 'deep state' was appointed by the donald himself.
More astonishing to me is that the FBI raided the home of the former president. And for most of the day, until further reporting came out, most Americans were left wondering which crime they were going after him for.
So... apparently the FBI still believes he is holding onto classified documents that he didn't ultimately provide with the last batch that he did turn over that may incriminate him (probably with respect to Jan 6th). There is still culpability on his part if he is holding onto classified documents that he was requested to turn over... regardless of what those documents contain. To do so would be to arrogantly disregard the law. So for those shouting "unfair" or "witch-hunt" the current situation would not exist if Trump had simply done what he was supposed to do. Or better said... not done what he did.
The thing that interests me is whether the extent of his lawlessness & arrogance is such that he was still sitting on incriminating documents that he had an opportunity to destroy or even tear up and "flush" ;) We will see but my initial opinion leans to the answer being "Yes".
Please, he was a martyr in your eyes the minute he took office to do battle against the âDeep Stateâ.
Of course in this case the guy leading the 'deep state' was appointed by the donald himself.
More astonishing to me is that the FBI raided the home of the former president. And for most of the day, until further reporting came out, most Americans were left wondering which crime they were going after him for.
Donald Trump is Jesus Christ