Trump is Toast

[Tom Montgomery]

.
MAGA: "Trump's indictment is politically motivated by the Dems!!"

Also MAGA: "Trump's indictment will guarantee a landslide victory over Biden!!"

[WI-Tom]

Your country, dudes. It's f×cked.

Maybe. I'm hoping not. I'm hoping it's the Republican Party that fits that label.

Tom

[RichW]

So, what does the Secret Service do if Trump goes to jail?

[Nicholas Carey]

So, what does the Secret Service do if Trump goes to jail?

At that point, we're completely off-piste. Nothing in the playbooks for it, sothey'll be winging it.

A couple Secret Service guys standing sentry outside his cell and next to him in the exercise yard, maybe?

[John Smith]

This has the potential to be very interesting. Trump may, again, be number 1; 1st president ever to.......

I sure hope he's indicted and convicted, but I know better than to count on it.

I did see a poll the other night 21% of FOX viewers responded as being inclined to be less trusting of FOX. That's a good start. There's an old saying that the truth usually wins out. Let's hope it does this time.

It's entirely possible he can be indicted and convicted in several courts. Some will convince themselves it was all rigged. Some will question what they've been told and what they believe.

A glimmer of hope?

[johnw]

So, what does the Secret Service do if Trump goes to jail?

Perhaps he could have a detail made up of the people who decided to have the phones wiped when they found out they were subpoenaed. They could all get matching tattoos and form a prison gang.

[Andrew2]

If any MAGA gun toters turn up to 'protect him' might he just be setting up another case against himself? Incitement? After the raft of prosecutions after the Capital mess, Might just a few have second thoughts? If they are bright enough....

[LeeG]

I like toast. He’s compost.

[TomF]

Seems to me that there are already criteria to determine if and when a serving or ex military person, law enforcement officer, or civil servant could be stripped of their benefits. No pension, no health care, etc.

The laws need to be updated to expressly include the President and VP, Cabinet members, and SCOTUS justices.

This would, imo, include stripping Secret Service protections which might otherwise be in place.

[WI-Tom]

Seems to me that there are already criteria to determine if and when a serving or ex military person, law enforcement officer, or civil servant could be stripped of their benefits. No pension, no health care, etc.

The laws need to be updated to expressly include the President and VP, Cabinet members, and SCOTUS justices.

This would, imo, include stripping Secret Service protections which might otherwise be in place.

The protections are not really intended for the protection of the individual ex-president. They are likely intended to protect what he knows, which might pose a security risk were that knowledge to fall into the wrong hands. So, no. I don't think stripping those would be good.

Tom

[TomF]

They're not exactly stellar at ensuring that function. Perhaps because their work is typically framed in terms of providing honorific protection to an elder statesman, rather than treating the ex-president as a repository of vulnerable national security information.

That is, providing a Secret Service detail as a bodyguard group implies they've misidentified the customer of the service.

The customer is the nation, rather than the ex-president. The ex-POTUS is to be viewed more like a human shaped safe or hard drive, which holds the state secrets to be guarded.

I don't think anyone's told the Secret Service agents not to die for the ex-POTUS, and in extremis to shoot the ex-POTUS themselves to ensure the national security information they know doesn't, say, get into Russian, Chinese, or Saudi hands. We know this exactly because the Trump's and their minions still walk the earth.

[Paul Pless]

what's all this talk of continued secret service protection?
don't we still execute people guilt of treason?

[johnw]

what's all this talk of continued secret service protection?
don't we still execute people guilt of treason?

The charge is fraud, at least the charge he's supposed to be arrested for on Tuesday.

I don't think he'll go to jail, but if he does, they don't have to send the Secret Service with him. Prisons have a wing for protective custody for prisoners likely to be assaulted by other prisoners. It's where they put child molesters. I know it seems wrong to put Trump in with a bunch of child molesters, but honestly, I don't care about their feelings.

[Garret]

The charge is fraud, at least the charge he's supposed to be arrested for on Tuesday.

I don't think he'll go to jail, but if he does, they don't have to send the Secret Service with him. Prisons has a wing for protective custody for prisoners likely to be assaulted by other prisoners. It's where they put child molesters. I know it seems wrong to put Trump in with a bunch of child molesters, but honestly, I don't care about their feelings.

Well said sir!

[Tom Montgomery]

To prepare for Trump’s arrest and the MAGA riots on Tuesday, our ANTIFA meeting will be split into 4 breakouts based on your woke focus:
-Indoctrination
-Gas stove removal
-Sightseeing
-Magnetism for mind control

Refreshments for our indictment party will be:
-Hamberders
-Diet Coke
-Taco bowl
-KFC
-Covfefe

[Mrleft88]

IF If he gets convicted, he will not go to jail. He will be under house arrest, and retain SS security. IF If for some reason he does not get a house arrest, he will go to one of the country club fed prisons, and will have a private detail watching him, but probably not SS.
Unless he chops off someone's head in court, he will not go in to general population prison. Even then it's more likely he'd be sent to some cushy psych institution, and have SS security. Silver hills may be holding a suite just for him.....

[johnw]

To prepare for Trump’s arrest and the MAGA riots on Tuesday, our ANTIFA meeting will be split into 4 breakouts based on your woke focus:
-Indoctrination
-Gas stove removal
-Sightseeing
-Magnetism for mind control

Refreshments for our indictment party will be:
-Hamberders
-Diet Coke
-Taco bowl
-KFC
-Covfefe

When I find myself in times of trouble
Mother Russia comes to me
Speaking words of wisdom,
Covfefe.

[JayInOz]

If any MAGA gun toters turn up to 'protect him' might he just be setting up another case against himself? Incitement? After the raft of prosecutions after the Capital mess, Might just a few have second thoughts? If they are bright enough....

Perhaps for their own good his most rabid supporters need to be informed in a public service announcement that if they answer the call and turn up and protest it could result in more charges against their glorious tinted leader- best to stay home and rite a leter to there congress person
Used to be a small time drug dealer lived just out of town here. Loud mouthed, lots of security cameras, lots of flashy jewellery. The police nailed him after months of surveillance, phone taps etc. One of the cops said he threw up and cried like a baby in the back of the paddy wagon all the way to the lockup. I keep thinking donny t will be exactly the same when he realises he can't bluff and bully his way out of this mess. JayInOz

[John Smith]

I'm guessing he's under more stress than ever. Let's hope this doesn't kill him; he'd be a martyr

[Nicholas Carey]

I'm guessing he's under more stress than ever. Let's hope this doesn't kill him; he'd be a martyr

I don't know. If TFG stroked out extemporaneously, and on his own, it would be a blessing to the country.

And think of Melania! Her life would be greatly improved.

[WI-Tom]

I don't know. If TFG stroked out extemporaneously, and on his own, it would be a blessing to the country.

I disagree. The rule of law needs to be shown to work. Trump needs to be tried, and if found guilty, he needs to be punished, and to be seen to be punished. Him dying would achieve none of that.

Tom

[Garret]

I disagree. The rule of law needs to be shown to work. Trump needs to be tried, and if found guilty, he needs to be punished, and to be seen to be punished. Him dying would achieve none of that.

Tom

More likely scenario:

Trump needs to be tried, and found not guilty because he can afford a zillion lawyers & the gov't is afraid of going after a former president.

or

Trump needs to be tried, and if found guilty, he needs to be let off with a slap on the wrist because we don't want to "set a precedent". [of course that's exactly what it's doing]

[Tom Montgomery]

.
.
A photo of the most corrupt president in American history shaking hands with Richard Nixon.

[John Smith]

.
.
A photo of the most corrupt president in American history shaking hands with Richard Nixon.

In a different direction, let's not let G.W. off the hook. He could have simply let the weapons inspectors have more time once they got total access. He chose not to.

He had no need to legalize torture. But he did. There are STILL people being held in GITMO that HAVEN'T BEEN CHARGED WITH ANYTHING.

That's a different kind of evil, but it's not something we should forget.

[David G]

Perhaps for their own good his most rabid supporters need to be informed in a public service announcement that if they answer the call and turn up and protest it could result in more charges against their glorious tinted leader- best to stay home and rite a leter to there congress person
Used to be a small time drug dealer lived just out of town here. Loud mouthed, lots of security cameras, lots of flashy jewellery. The police nailed him after months of surveillance, phone taps etc. One of the cops said he threw up and cried like a baby in the back of the paddy wagon all the way to the lockup. I keep thinking donny t will be exactly the same when he realises he can't bluff and bully his way out of this mess. JayInOz

Doubtful but maybe. I suspect, though, that his own 'legend' is so firmly ingrained and so totally 'him' now that he'll go on believing himself invulnerable until the 'fire' command is issued. Your young punk was more likely a 'poseur' with a less firm encapsulation of his own persona.

[TomF]

He'll be convicted of something, because there are too many pieces of evidence to fully ignore. What's to argue about whether he lied about refusing to turn over Presidential documents (some marked classified) after court orders, a subpoena, etc.? The documents were there. The FBI found them, after being given a sworn statement they didn't exist. He's claimed many things about them in rally speeches, but among other things he's gone through interminable court processes claiming the documents were his, and that the FBI must be forced to return them.

What's to argue about whether Trump pressured Georgia officials into finding him 11k votes? We've all heard the 1 recorded conversation, and we know that the grand jury has heard 2 further. He's boasted about the conversations in his rally speeches, never denying they happened. He claims they were "perfect."

And then there's Stormy Daniels. Who was paid hush money to stay silent during an election campaign. Cohen went to jail, prosecuted by Trump's own administration for his part in what's already been thereby established in court as a crime. Not as serious as the insurrection or fake electors or documents, but uncontested as criminal.

And if Trump's indicted this week with felonies, routine protocol requires that he'll have his cheek swabbed for DNA. Which will then be fed into the ordinary databases used by law enforcement to see if there are any matches to open cases. Like E. Jean Carroll's case, for instance. Or the cases of a couple of other sexual assault victims whoover the years claimed Trump as a perp, and may have had rape kits completed at the time.

As a twitter guy said earlier today, the Republicans aren't arguing that Trump's innocent, as the possible indictments loom. They're claiming that a decision to indict shows political motives, and that prosecutors ought to have different priorities. Should prosecute other types of perps instead.

Screw that. Imo a top priority ought to be to prosecute any high profile politician where evidence is sufficient to expect to convict and sustain a conviction. Exactly to show that laws apply to lawmakers too. Especially the highest ranks of the political cadre.

[JayInOz]

I reckon enough of the influential republicans now want trump gone that they will quietly be happy to see him prosecuted. He's become a liability to their noble cause. I'd love to know how many things they could have gone after trump for but won't bother. For example more than a hundred gifts to the trumps and Kushner from foreign governments, worth almost three hundred grand, which they kept and which by law must be inventoried and handed over to the U.S. government to be held in storage as government property.
I note also that Hunter Biden has launched legal action against the feller who kept his laptop and released images and information from it to his republican buddies and media. Seems he's broken several Delaware laws and has no legal defence. JayInOz

[John Smith]

I reckon enough of the influential republicans now want trump gone that they will quietly be happy to see him prosecuted. He's become a liability to their noble cause. I'd love to know how many things they could have gone after trump for but won't bother. For example more than a hundred gifts to the trumps and Kushner from foreign governments, worth almost three hundred grand, which they kept and which by law must be inventoried and handed over to the U.S. government to be held in storage as government property.
I note also that Hunter Biden has launched legal action against the feller who kept his laptop and released images and information from it to his republican buddies and media. Seems he's broken several Delaware laws and has no legal defence. JayInOz

Stay tuned. Be hard to make this stuff up. What's their 'noble' cause?

[Chip-skiff]

From The New Yorker: More Thoughts and Prayers. . .

"Trump is shrewd enough to reap political gain if he is indicted this week in New York. Just as he played the martyr when the F.B.I. recovered classified files from Mar-a-Lago or when he was investigated, repeatedly, in Congress, he will once more complain that he, like his loyal followers, is the victim of élite disdain and persecution.

But this strategy of martyrdom is unlikely to prevail. Time will run out for Trump, be it in Georgia, at the Department of Justice, or, if it goes on that long, at the ballot box. It’s not even clear that the most vociferous of the pro-Trump groups such as the Proud Boys and the Three Percenters, which have endured intense investigation and legal charges for their roles in the Capitol insurrection, will be eager to take to the streets again in Trump’s name. Recently, Ali Alexander, one of the organizers of the Stop the Steal rallies that followed the 2020 election, posted on social media, 'Previously, I had said if Trump was arrested or under the threat of a perp walk, 100,000 patriots should shut down all routes to Mar-a-Lago. Now, I’m retired. I’ll pray for him though!'”

https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily...s-legal-dramas

[Landrith]

This has the feel of a bad passion play. The fringe Right has been saying since November 2022 that their plan is Trump getting arrested. It finally happens just in time to cover the revelations of the Deep state's policies have led to economic ruin. A ruin Trump could not have prevented, and the few things that had the potential to lessen the end of the fiat dollar were quickly undone when Trump left. As a Republican, I can admit Nixon taking the US off the gold standard was a default, and that under Reagan, most of America's industrial base was moved overseas.

Looking at the more than 100 US banks in big trouble last week, mostly it seems a foreseeable and inevitable result of W. Bush bailing out the banks. Doing it again will end the middle class. Trump won't be enough. The rich will have to silence or lock up every Populist before this is over.

[Nicholas Carey]

That's a lot of word salad.

Pro tip: It's unfair to say that manufacturing didn't move overseas under Reagan. And I am hardly a fan of the moron.

NAFTA took effect in 1994.

The WTO, not until 1995, but its predecessor, GATT, had been going since 1948.

It's fair to say, though, that both parties in the 1980s and 1990s were gung-ho for both, under the dubious proposition that "free trade" would bootstrap 3rd-world countries' economies and lift them into the 1st or 2nd world. And bring democracy, free-market capitalism, etc. [how'd that work out?]

The real reason was that large multinational corporations wanted the ability to engage in regulatory and wage arbitrage and move manufacturing to wherever their overall costs were lowest - thus avoiding environmental, labor, safety, and other regulations.

Here in the USA, we haven't so much cleaned up or stopped our pollution as outsourced it.

And our outsourcing manufacturing has kept prices low here, yes, but at the cost of depressing wages here, masking actual inflation and increasing corporate profit margins.

[Landrith]

Pro tip: It's unfair to say that manufacturing didn't move overseas under Reagan. And I am hardly a fan of the moron.

NAFTA took effect in 1994.

The WTO, not until 1995, but its predecessor, GATT, had been going since 1948.

I have been content here in this forum to blame it all on Bill Clinton and NAFTA, like the proto-Trump Ross Perot described as the "Big Sucking Sound". During the period, I worked in a door manufacturer in union free SE Kansas in a plant we took from Canada. And in the race to the bottom, the company's Matamoros factory managers would be in the plant once a month to see what they could take from us and each quarter, the Malaysian factory managers would come through.

But, with age and perspective, I have become a Historical Revisionist https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_revisionism. Rockefeller led deindustrialization of America (https://jacobin.com/2018/01/new-york...ustrialization) began before Bill Clinton (no conspiracy pun intended as to Clinton's true parentage). First came Reagan led deregulation. https://www.businessinsider.com/what...the-80s-2017-7

[Hallam]

Early investigations are beginning into some money laundering activities related to a few million dollars, 6 to 12 million, received by Truth Media from a known Russian individual with close connections to Putin. Apparently there is a whistleblower source from inside Truth Media assisting in investigations:

[Gerarddm]

I find it boggling that no Federal law prohibits convicted felons from serving as President.

Eugene Debs ran for Prez when incarcerated and IIRC got over 100,000 votes. Nutsburgers.

[Joe (SoCal)]

IMG_6201.jpg