I bet < 10% of the voting population will ever read the indictment. ... and the other >90% will still be able to vote. The optices--GOP aside--still skew heavily in the direction of 'witch hunt.' If the case goes to a jury, the propects are bleak for Trump. ...but if the case gets kicked for legal deficiencies (still some gray area as to whether DJT could hold on to the docs--which places the entire case in jeopardy)--it will be an epic Wile E. Coyote, bomb blowing up in the face fail, for Smith, G'land, Biden...the entire Dem. party. That's just facts as to what's at stake. My money is on the case getting kicked. Upon what legal basis, you ask? Why, upon the legal basis the Judge or appellate court (as the case may be), invoke, in their opinion. And 45, will become...47. (and if you think I'm crazy, why I'd say you just haven't been paying attention).
In evaluating whether Americans think the charges are partisan versus not partisan, one could argue that Democrats and Republicans both have biases and we should be interested in the initial impressions of Americans who are independent/no party affiliation. I didn't even see that number in the article.
We have one Pub poster wanting DOJ to just look the other way for Trump and another predicting that some imaginary legal deficiency will allow a judge to get Trump off the hook. Neither poster defends Trump's innocence (pretty useless anyway) but both want him to run and win in '24. Saddens me.
Can't speak for 92, but I want DeSantis to win. I don't want him to run, but I don't think it should be decided like this.
Me too. "We'll destroy leftism in this country." That sounds like democracy to me! Just the right and that's it!
A prediction is not a declaration of desire. It's just a very real prospect. Fwiw, I voted for Rubio > Trump in the '16 primary, and I'd vote for RonnyD > Trump if that's the ticket. Still early. Who knows what the ticket will look like...NEXT YEAR. I'm very, very much open to another, fresher name on the ballot. No problem with RonnyD, I'd just like to think we can do better (though I KNOW we can and have done, way worse).
I believe the quote was closer to "we will end woke in my 8 years in DC" so it sounds like there will be large scale executions of non-republicans on his watch.
The weakness of the case, is that it's complicated, dry, and until evidence is introduced, sounds procedural. As to the timing--as I alluded to previously, it's not too hard a stretch to think that DJT was likely holding out until he could market some of that intel. But, that's pure conjecture. Not a lick of evidence to support that. Hence, I can't help but thinking, if I were heading up the investigation--I think I would have let some more rope loose. Get surveillance on MAL, pull back on the asking for the docs, bait him into comfort/comlacency, let him think he outsmarted the world...lay some lines in the water...wait for a bite. Had they busted him in the process of seeking to sell the intel, you wouldn't have so much doubt lingering over 'process cirmes'/witch hunt. Instead, now, they have get convictions, or...nuclear disaster. IMHO, I think in their lust to bust Trump for anything, they may have pulled ahead of their skis, and prevented him from actually hanging himself (I mean, the indictment depicts undeniable stupidity; not hard to figure he'd go that exract stupid). But...lucky for whomever might find it so...I was not in charge of the investigation. C'est la vie.
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis indirectly condemns Trump indictment on campaign trail "As a naval officer, if I would have taken classified [documents] to my apartment, I would have been court-martialed in a New York minute," DeSantis said. RINO?
That would be unbelievably irresponsible on the part of the DOJ if they purposefully allowed Trump the latitude to sell the docs. They also don't need that to prove a crime or get a conviction. From what I've read from former Federal prosecutors, I think you're greatly underestimating the legal risk Trump is facing along with the likelihood of conviction. These are some of the most highly experienced prosecutors in the DOJ on one of the most high profile cases in our history. The odds of them overlooking a legal technically that would lead to the case being thrown out are close to zero. Crazy things can happen like a Trump zealot making it onto the jury, but I think in that case it would be a hung jury and the DOJ could re-try the case (one of the legal experts here please correct me if I'm wrong).
I’m obviously not a lawyer but the case being heard in a red state, in a part of the state that Trump won, being heard by a Trump appointed judge who previously went out of her way to help Trump, and with a probable Trump friendly jury, I’m not sure that having a team of highly skilled prosecutors will be enough.
In a ballroom he stored stolen docs That were secret and that really shocks Yet he claims all along That he did nothing wrong It's no secret he's dumber than rocks
Nope, Cocodrilo was correct. DeSaster said he "will be able to destroy leftism in this country." Video of Ron DeSantis vowing to "destroy leftism" viewed 7m times
Just finished reading the indictment. It reflects an incredibly through investigation, as was called for given that it involved a former president. It is uncalled for -- and dangerous - to suggest the indictment was politically motivated. Our entire way of life depends upon respect for the justice system, a system widely admired. That way of life becomes endangered when political hacks stoop to accusing the Justice Department of wrongly bringing charges. A jury will decide Trump's fate, and should he be convicted - and I'm convinced he will be - I've no doubt some will disparage the jury.
