Should the Justice Department indict Trump?

[Sun_Worshiper]

Funny (sort of), but in all seriousness it is hard to see how getting indicted for paying hush money to a porn star helps Trump win the election in 2024.

"Democrats are so scared of me, they're throwing the kitchen sink at me. I didn't pay her any money. My lawyer, Michael [Cohen], did. I just paid his bill, then took advantage of tax law to deduct the expense. Which is legal, by the way."

I don't know that it wins him legions of new fans or anything, but I don't see it hurting him. It plays into the Republic persecution fantasy, and gives them feels for scaring the shit out of Democrats with their guy. That's all attractive to them. But they're going to line up behind him (again) once he wins the nomination anyway, so it's kind of irrelevant.

Trump didn't have a big enough coalition to win the election in 2020, even before January 6th and this indictment. How would these enormous stains on his already tarnished reputation help him win over Independents, pull Democrats to his side, or bring along the Republicans who were too sickened by his awfulness to vote for him in 2020? I don't see it.

The stronger case is that it gives him a boost in the race for the Republican nomination, although even there I don't think this will help him. He's already running as a loser with a ton of baggage. There are other, better options out there, with Desantis being the obvious choice. This just seems like one more reason for Republicans to move on, even if many of them feel that it is political and that he is a victim of prosecutorial overreach.

And there may be more indictments - and more serious indictments - in his future.

[Parasaurolophus]

Regardless, these assumptions should not factor into the decision to charge him or not.  The impact of this is far too unpredictable, but more importantly,  the justice system should be independent of politics.

Absolutely. ITMFA!

Trump didn't have a big enough coalition to win the election in 2020, even before January 6th and this indictment. How would these enormous stains on his already tarnished reputation help him win over Independents, pull Democrats to his side, or bring along the Republicans who were too sickened by his awfulness to vote for him in 2020? I don't see it.

Trump very nearly did win 2020. Wisconsin was the state that put Biden over the EC mark, and he won it by 0.6 points, 49.4%-48.8%. Georgia and Arizona were even closer. That was painted as the once-in-a-lifetime-make-or-break election for Democrats. 22 million more people voted in 2020 than in 2016. I doubt they can paint this election like that, and they're sitting on a so-so record of doing stuff, with many of the early gains petering out or being reversed at this point (FFS, they're considering reinstating the family separation policy!). I don't think Republicans care about Trump's reputation at all. They care about booting out Democrats and imposing their (unpopular, theocratic, fascist, etc.) will on them.

The stronger case is that it gives him a boost in the race for the Republican nomination, although even there I don't think this will help him. He's already running as a loser with a ton of baggage. There are other, better options out there, with Desantis being the obvious choice. This just seems like one more reason for Republicans to move on, even if many of them feel that it is political and that he is a victim of prosecutorial overreach.

And there may be more indictments - and more serious indictments - in his future.

As I see it, Trump's got the unwavering support of ~30% of Republican primary voters. That's enough to put him ahead in a primary that's contested between several candidates. More importantly, though, that's enough for him to hold Republicans hostage: if they nominate someone else and he decides to run as a third party, that's the election lost for Republicans.

They might prefer DeSantis as a somewhat sanitized Trump, but I think they'd rather not tank the election (and possibly the party) entirely. DeSantis looks to me like he's hoping Trump's legal woes will prevent him from running. But, honestly, I don't think he'll fare well in the contest with Trump. He is, after all, just imitating Trump, and Trump pointing that out will definitely sway a chunk of Republicans. It's his party, after all. And Trump's already insinuated that he's a pedophile, and it's a plausible charge because he was the creepy teacher partying with his under-age students. I expect he'll lean into that, and no doubt so will QAnon. Even if DeSantis makes it through the primary, that will be very damaging.

Besides, he's not running as a loser. He's running as the president-in-exile. Party-wide persecution narrative, remember?  =/

[Sun_Worshiper]

^^^^^^^^^

I get your point, but I just don't see it. Trump has his die hards and he could get the nomination in a crowded Republican field. But the question is whether being indicted will help him politically and I don't think it will. It is one more reason not to nominate a guy who many Republicans are ready to move on from. And I don't see any case for this helping him in the general election.

[Sun_Worshiper]

Bump... Lots of rumblings over the last few days.

[nebo113]

Bump... Lots of rumblings over the last few days.

My completely unfounded prognostication is....yup.  In Florida, with Marky Meadows turning rat.

[nebo113]

Bump... Lots of rumblings over the last few days.

My completely unfounded prognostication is....yup.  In Florida, with Marky Meadows turning rat.

Dang!  Quoting myself 'cuz I demonstrated such stellar wisdom, though we'll have to wait on the trial to see if little Marky turned rat.

[Parasaurolophus]

So... uh... Aileen Cannon will be the judge presiding over these indictments...

Let's let that sink in, shall we?

[nebo113]

So... uh... Aileen Cannon will be the judge presiding over these indictments...

Let's let that sink in, shall we?

Like a stone wrapped in heavy chain around a truck battery and tossed into the ocean off Palm Beach.

[Caracal]

So... uh... Aileen Cannon will be the judge presiding over these indictments...

Let's let that sink in, shall we?

My impression from lawyers I've seen is that
a. It's not even clear she's assigned permanently to the case-might just be the arraignment
b. Even if she is, the justice department will almost certainly get her removed if she doesn't remove herself and there's plenty of precedent for that if a judge has made previous decisions which could taint her credibility in the public sphere. Have no way of judging that, but I don't think it's something to spend much time worrying about.

[nebo113]

So... uh... Aileen Cannon will be the judge presiding over these indictments...

Let's let that sink in, shall we?

My impression from lawyers I've seen is that
a. It's not even clear she's assigned permanently to the case-might just be the arraignment
b. Even if she is, the justice department will almost certainly get her removed if she doesn't remove herself and there's plenty of precedent for that if a judge has made previous decisions which could taint her credibility in the public sphere. Have no way of judging that, but I don't think it's something to spend much time worrying about.

Read today that the Clerk of that court said she'd stay unless she recused herself.  It will be interesting to watch unfold.

[ciao_yall]

So... uh... Aileen Cannon will be the judge presiding over these indictments...

Let's let that sink in, shall we?

My impression from lawyers I've seen is that
a. It's not even clear she's assigned permanently to the case-might just be the arraignment
b. Even if she is, the justice department will almost certainly get her removed if she doesn't remove herself and there's plenty of precedent for that if a judge has made previous decisions which could taint her credibility in the public sphere. Have no way of judging that, but I don't think it's something to spend much time worrying about.

Read today that the Clerk of that court said she'd stay unless she recused herself.  It will be interesting to watch unfold.

In a way, the pressure is on her to be extremely scrupulous. If she manipulates things too blatantly, the Justice Department would appeal and potentially put her up on charges of misconduct.

[nebo113]

So... uh... Aileen Cannon will be the judge presiding over these indictments...

Let's let that sink in, shall we?

My impression from lawyers I've seen is that
a. It's not even clear she's assigned permanently to the case-might just be the arraignment
b. Even if she is, the justice department will almost certainly get her removed if she doesn't remove herself and there's plenty of precedent for that if a judge has made previous decisions which could taint her credibility in the public sphere. Have no way of judging that, but I don't think it's something to spend much time worrying about.

Read today that the Clerk of that court said she'd stay unless she recused herself.  It will be interesting to watch unfold.

In a way, the pressure is on her to be extremely scrupulous. If she manipulates things too blatantly, the Justice Department would appeal and potentially put her up on charges of misconduct.

That would certainly put the prosecution in a dreadful bind.

[jimbogumbo]

I completely agree with this sentiment from Neil Steinberg: https://www.everygoddamnday.com

[Puget]

So... uh... Aileen Cannon will be the judge presiding over these indictments...

Let's let that sink in, shall we?

My impression from lawyers I've seen is that
 a. It's not even clear she's assigned permanently to the case-might just be the arraignment
b. Even if she is, the justice department will almost certainly get her removed if she doesn't remove herself and there's plenty of precedent for that if a judge has made previous decisions which could taint her credibility in the public sphere. Have no way of judging that, but I don't think it's something to spend much time worrying about.

Read today that the Clerk of that court said she'd stay unless she recused herself.  It will be interesting to watch unfold.

In a way, the pressure is on her to be extremely scrupulous. If she manipulates things too blatantly, the Justice Department would appeal and potentially put her up on charges of misconduct.

I can imagine that this may actually be strategic on the part of the prosecutors -- they think they have an air tight case given that they have actual recordings etc., and so would prefer to have a win before a clearly Trump-friendly judge so there can't be any reasonable claim that the judge was biased against him. Besides which, it will be a jury trial from what I understand?

[kaysixteen]

Well, ah, Trump and Trump alone retains the right to waive this right to a jury trial and insist on a bench one.   IIRC, there would be nothing the prosecutors could do about that?