Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
This should be a surprise to nobody. He was expected to try this regardless of the circumstances.
The question is whether or not Cannon will grant the request. If she does, she's going to cement her career as being nothing more than a partisan hack bought and paid for by Trump. If she doesn't, he's going to try to sabotage the trial by turning the MAGA Hate Machine in her direction and let the attacks fly.
Either way, there's a political shitstorm coming.
And what does cementing her career as a trump hack do to her? If it's nothing, then it's all by design
For real, like, has she not already done enough to cement her as a partisan hack? Why would this one more thing make anything different?
And what does cementing her career as a trump hack do to her? If it’s nothing, then it’s all by design
At least we'll know right out of the gate if she's going to at least give the appearance of impartiality by denying the request, or if she's not even going to bother trying to be impartial and just all but tell us to sit back and wait for the eventual acquittal.
Reportedly, Jack Smith has more charges he can bring against Trump in New Jersey if Cannon decides she's a puppet for Trump.
Right, but at some point (in terms of public opinion here), filing charges in NJ because the FL charges didn't work out is going to play right into Trump's playbook of being painted as a victim of political persecution, which will galvanize support (and fundraising) from his base and increase the chances of a MAGA nut getting on the jury and pushing for jury nullification because "it's all a witch hunt".
Yes, there are tons of legitimate reasons for this to happen (with, you know, the whole Trump committing multiple crimes in multiple states and all that), but one thing I learned in college is that when it comes to public opinion, if you have to explain your position in that level of detail, you already lost the argument. While this wouldn't matter 99.999999% of the time, it matters in this case because it could impact his prosecution.
I don't disagree with your predictions, but the whole point is that public opinion won't matter if the judge is not a hack. That is to say, who cares if Trump says it's a witch hunt if he's charged again in NJ? He's already saying that.
It's one thing to say "It's all a witch hunt". We've been hearing that for years.
But it's a completely different thing to say "It's all a witch hunt! See what Jack Smith is doing?" when he can point to Smith filing cases in NJ because his FL case is at risk. And then you have the upcoming GA case. Is this all legitimate? Absolutely. But to someone who doesn't follow this stuff significantly? It does give off the appearance that the government is just trying to throw whatever they can at as many walls as possible just to see what sticks. Especially if he follows this up with charges in DC stemming from the J6 investigation.
Doing this accomplishes two things: One is that it's going to galvanize his base and increase his support, which could lead to greater turnout at the polls. The other is that it increases his chances that one of his supporters will end up on one of the juries and push for jury nullification "to counter the government's witch hunt".
This is why I say that this is the .00000001% of time where it matters.
I honestly don't know what you're arguing here. Are you saying the justice department should bow to public pressure and not attempt to hold Trump accountable for his actions?
I'm saying that the way that the fact that he is filing multiple charges in multiple states is going to give off the impression that "it's all a witch hunt". It may be the only way he can do it (because of the crimes being committed in multiple states, etc.), and I'm not saying he's wrong for doing it. But I am saying that it's going to have the side effect of playing right into Trump's hands in a way that is likely to help him in the general election (by incentivizing more of his supporters to vote and send him money), and possibly in at least one of his upcoming trials as well.
I think you are vastly overestimating this effect. What subset of Trump supporters are not already all-in on supporting him, but would become so if he was charged with additional crimes in another state? (where those crimes took place.)
To me that would be even worse. It would've Trump admitting he'd only get a favorable trial if it was a judge in his pocket
His attempt at smearing Smith didn't go anywhere
It is more than just that - I was reading something earlier that talked about the scheduling of trials in general: State and local trials typically defer to federal trials when there is a conflict. If she choses to delay, the states (NY, possibly GA) will step in and run their trials, which could delay things on the federal calendar. Federal judges do not defer to the states - if she did so, she'd piss off every judge on the federal bench - not just the left leaning ones.
if she did so, she’d piss off every judge on the federal bench - not just the left leaning ones.
This hasn't stopped her before. Remember that the last time she got slapped down, the members of the panel were all GOP. She cares about serving Trump. Pissing off the party in the process is just a cost of doing business.
Shouldn't the election be a reason to expedite trial? So people know the outcome of the trial... this logic feels backwards.
"Hey let's wait on the trial so I can take the time to try to get more power than you and forgive myself of all wrong doing."
That's exactly what Trump is trying to do. We all knew he was going to try this from day one. The only question is whether or not he'd be successful.
And obviously, a logical person would think that the trial should be expedited so the public knows whether or not they're voting for a convicted criminal. But this is Cannon, who has already said Trump deserves special treatment. He's now asking for it. Let's see if she gives it to him.
Fuck Trump!
Depends. Which Trump?
Donald, Donald Jr, or Eric? Fuck no.
Melania? After enough drinks, maaaaaaaaaaaaaybe........
Ivanka? Ok. She's hot. I could deal with that.
Ivanka? Ok. She’s hot. I could deal with that.
So you're admitting you do have something in common with The Donald?
Yes. We both want to fuck his daughter and pretend the two boys never existed. The only thing is that when I do it, it's not all sorts of creepy and incesty.
Ha, just double wrap in condoms. That bitch probably carrying top secret STIs.
This is a common tactic by every defense attorney... Delay, delay, delay. In my opinion unless you have extenuating circumstances, the request should always be denied.
Right. This would be a complete non-story if it were any other judge. But the fact that this is Cannon significantly increases the chances that this request will be granted as she already has a significant history of going out of her way to accommodate Trump and even saying he deserves special treatment because of who he is.
Also, the delay would benefit Trump more significantly than other defendants with his campaign and potentially becoming president or being pardoned by the republican opponent if they win.
Expect this to happen over and over. His legal team are going to stall any and all trials as much as possible, hoping that they can be dealt with after the presidential election.
If Trump wins the election, there won’t be a trial. He will try to pardon himself or have the DOJ to drop the case. I expect he will do everything to delay the trial until after the election.
There is all the reason for an expedited trial. This guy needs to be taken off the roads ASAP.
How can someone vote on a person who literally is being tried for a crime? What in the world have we become?
To be fair, given our current political climate, this is likely going to become a non-issue in the future. We are already seeing the GOP going into revenge mode by launching sham investigations and either pressing or threatening to press criminal charges on political enemies. I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to see having your political opponents charged with crimes becoming the norm, making voting for someone accused of a crime also becoming the norm as well.
Look at the GOP's "Biden Crime Family" mantra. I wouldn't be surprised if they attempt to press charges against Biden before the election. That way, Trump can say Biden is being charged too, and setting up a situation where voting for an indicted criminal becomes normalized, and therefore "no big deal."
Think of how much Trump and the GOP have normalized all sorts of shady activities in the past few years. Things that would have immediately brought down any other politician before 2015 or so are now just par for the course and don't even make the news most of the time. This would just be another addition to that list.
Not to imply Trump is at all similar, but Martin Luther King was arrested 29 times and even had the FBI tracking him.
The idea that someone who is a convicted criminal or is being tried in a criminal case cannot participate in politics is a very dangerous precedent to set.
What in the world have we become?
I in no way mean this to defend Trump, but being tried for a crime does not mean one is guilty of a crime. And at a very (very) abstract level, even being guilty of a crime does not make a person necessarily unfit for office.
I know you're right. It just feels bad taking the high road when the accused has demonstrated he is manifestly unfit for office while also caught dead to rights under a mountain of publicly known evidence which includes his own admission of guilt.
Yes, in this specific instance, especially with this specific crime and these specific bits of evidence, it should be a slam dunk for anyone with any sense to refuse to support Trump.
But, that could have been said in 2016, too. Trump didn't just show up in 2015 when he started running for President, or even when he lead that super racist "birther" movement prior to that; he's been a terrible person his entire life, and no one gets a full pass on voting for him, no matter which time they did it, as far as I'm concerned. People that support Trump, especially in 2023, don't give two shits about whether he's qualified for the job. It's a cult of personality; nothing more. I'm only half joking when I suggest that if Trump died of natural causes in a month, he'd still have a good chance of winning the GOP nomination. His supporters just don't care about consequences or reality. Whatever triggers the lizard-part of their brain is what they do.
Sorry for the rant. haha
In his case, he's been a turd in society's punchbowl for 50 years.
There's mountains of court records, poor business decisions, and proven malfeasance... and that's not counting two impeachments.
No accounting for taste, I suppose.