First do not shoot the messenger….
Before there is an uproar about this post It is not my opinion,(I think Trump the d/bag should be in jail) this is some guy writing in the NYTimes…..so do not take your hatred out on me.
We all have heard of the many indictments that have been filed on our beloved Trump…..everything from corruption to secret documents….and there is a wealth of opinions on how these trials should play out….
This is one man’s opinion.
The Justice Department and special counsel Jack Smith made a “tragic choice” in deciding to go after former President Trump, argues Harvard Law professor Jack Goldsmith in a New York Times essay. To be clear, it’s not a defense of Trump—Goldsmith calls the former president’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election “reprehensible.” But even if Smith is able to get a conviction, it won’t be worth it, because “the costs to the legal and political systems will be large,” warns Goldsmith, and they will only “compound the harms to the nation from Mr. Trump’s many transgressions.” Goldsmith lays out the context, including the “deeply unfortunate timing” of the indictment coming amid the 2024 race. The Justice Department’s motivations might be “pure,” but the perception of unfairness is real for Trump supporters, writes Goldsmith.
This comes after similar gripes about the FBI investigation of Trump’s ties to Russia and complaints that Democrats such as Hunter Biden have gotten preferential treatment. And it is within this context that a large part of the nation will “fairly judge” the legitimacy of this case. Thus, the “prosecution may well have terrible consequences … for our politics and the rule of law,” Goldsmith warns. For one thing, expect more “tit-for-tat investigations of presidential actions in office by future Congresses.” Not that these concerns should absolve Trump, he adds. “The difficult question is whether redressing his shameful acts through criminal law is worth the enormous costs to the country. The bitter pill is that the nation must absorb these costs to figure out the answer to that question.”
Read the full essay.
Reminder–Not my thoughts….just passing on what some are saying about the prosecution of an ex-president.
What are your thoughts?
On another note….the GOP is asking for candidates to sign a loyalty pledge….Trump refuses….
Former President Donald Trump said Wednesday he won’t sign a pledge to support the Republican nominee if he loses the GOP presidential primary, flouting a requirement for appearing in the first debate later this month, the AP reports. “Why would I sign it?” Trump said in an interview on the conservative cable network Newsmax. “I can name three or four people that I wouldn’t support for president. So right there, there’s a problem.” He declined to name the candidates he wouldn’t support, saying “there’s no reason to insult them.” But he singled out South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott and businessman Vivek Ramaswamy for praise, saying they “have been very nice.”
Trump said he will announce next week whether he’ll participate in the debate, scheduled for Aug. 23 in Milwaukee, but his refusal to sign the pledge suggests he plans to make good on his threat to skip it. Trump has repeatedly questioned why he should debate his rivals given his substantial polling lead and has suggested he might hold a competing event instead. On Wednesday, he pushed back against former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie’s taunts, telling Newsmax’s Eric Bolling that there’s no upside to participating in a debate when he’s already leading by a wide margin. “Its not a question of guts. It’s a question of intelligence,” Trump said.
Eight candidates say they have met qualifications to be on stage in Milwaukee; in addition to polling and donor requirements, they also must sign a statement pledging not to participate in any debates not sanctioned by the party, including the general election debates sponsored by the Commission on Presidential Debates, and to support the winner of the Republican primary. “I affirm that if I do not win the 2024 Republican nomination of President of the United States, I will honor the will of the primary voters and support the nominee in order to save our country and beat Joe Biden,” the pledge says, according to a copy posted by Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis to X, the social media site formerly known as Twitter. Candidates also must pledge not to run as an independent, write-in candidate or third-party nominee.
I do not like the idea of a loyalty pledge….that keeps candidates from trying to find a common ground with the voter…..so sadly I am with Trump on this proposal.
Any thoughts on this situation?
I Read, I Write, You Know
“lego ergo scribo”
I recently ran into an interesting CNN article explaining the entire history of the Trump-Biden roles in the exiting Afghanistan debacle, following some interviews with key players on all sides.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/09/opinions/trump-biden-afghanistan-withdrawal-taliban-bergen-tillman/index.html
As to your specific post here… my thoughts side with the carrying forward of the judicial process against Trump given the preponderance of evidence is so apparent of the crimes. Let a jury decide. Being televised would help in some level of transparency to Trump’s base. But I do also worry how the more agitated, gun-totting elements of his base might conduct themselves when the jury issues a guilty verdict (notice I said “when”). To do nothing just to avoid civil violence would be the greater travesty. Democracy.. and the pursuit of justice according to the Constitution, was never meant to be an easy-street process. People may indeed be injured or die in clashes down the line… and sadly that could be the price to pay to defend the Constitution… not from some foreign enemy, but from ourselves.
THanx for the link I will check it out….I agree take this thing to the limit….let other slugs in the woodwork see how we handle threats to our nation. What about the loyalty pl;edge? chuq
I agree with Pete .. loyalty pledges are pointless. Actually, they are psychological narcissistic tools (if a political party itself can be narcissistic). Rather akin to a woman needing to assure a man is committed only to her before marrying him. 🙂 Some things are better left to faith, love, and voluntary loyalty.
Agreed…..and Trump will walk because 91% of FOX viewers (media of Trump) think he did nothing wrong and they will sit on a jury….chuq
I honestly don’t think he will walk. You have to measure the number of indictment charges and not so much number of trials. Once this fourth indictment charge(s) comes along it will be a matter of odds he will escape it all. Jury selection will be intricate…. the Smith Jan. 6 trial is in D.C., and only 5% voted for Trump in the last election. Trump lawyers obviously want a change of venue to Virginia because some 60% there voted for him. The judge is not at all likely to shift venue based on election results. As for the Mar-a-Lago thing, that jury pool will be from Florida…. but jury selection will have to be sharply done to weed out Trump-obsessives. The GA election case.. again, a Red State.. but good questioning will be ok. I personally think Trump is going to find a fair amount of guilty verdicts on lots of counts…. and that’s when we very likely could see the gun-totting nutjobs try something.
91% of Fox viewers do not think he did anything wrong….jury pool….70% of Repubs do not think he did anything wrong….more jury pool….and we know these people will lie so how do you keep them off a jury? chuq
Serving on a jury is not dependent on political party but the questioning to determine an ability to be objective to the evidence provided. People have lied to try and serve on juries and to get out of jury duty.. lawyers use jury consultants. This is a science. As with anything it’s not perfect of course. Have faith, my son.
No it does not depend on affiliation but the mindset is there and they will do all they can to protect. It is hard to have faith when SCOTUS is a political tool. chuq
Whatever the outcome of Trump’s trial (s), his fan base will never accept the fact that he was put on trial in the first place. But not to prosecute him at all would have given an official seal of approval to his actions.
As for loyalty agreements, I think they are pointless. Even if Trump signed one now, he would never keep to it if he didn’t get the nomination.
Best wishes, Pete.
I think Trump will walk….I do not agree with these pledges no matter the party….they are as worthless as tit on a boar. chuq
It’s so difficult to answer the question – no one is above the law, but the attempt to destroy our democracy is amped up with this sideshow…worth it? Again, tough question –
It is a tough one….and I have laid out my thoughts in the comments….chuq