Cart 0

Dems have gone too far by indicting Trump

Posted by John Reed on

Trump got indicted by a grand jury. It appears, this is an action only a Trump hater could love. I need to see the polls, but I expect Trump will go up because the voters will think Dems are trying to deny them the right to choose him as their guy.
We have long known Trump is a ham—which Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines as “someone who enjoys performing and who tends to behave in an exaggerated or playful way when people are watching” It is a word that is no longer used in that way. Bob Hope used it.
So it cannot be a total surprise that Trump is now a ham sandwich.
“Sol Wachtler, the former chief judge of New York state, coined the term in a January 1985 interview with the New York Daily News’ Marcia Kramer and Frank Lombardi. The relevant bit:

“In a bid to make prosecutors more accountable for their actions, Chief Judge Sol Wachtler has proposed that the state scrap the grand jury system of bringing criminal indictments.

“Wachtler, who became the state’s top judge earlier this month, said district attorneys now have so much influence on grand juries that “by and large” they could get them to “indict a ham sandwich.”

Preventing YOU from voting for Trump

Dems are trying in several ways to legally ban Trump from running for president. If they succeed, when Trump exhausts all appeals, he will do something he may not have done absent this indictment: Endorse the GOP presidential nominee.

All-time highest turnout?

Turnout matters. You wanna see turnout? Try using some legal technicality to bar the front-running candidate of one of the major parties from running for president. Trump would be a martyr. And he also loves this sort of stuff. I expect it would produce the highest turnout by any U.S. party in any election in history.

Trump could be Matthew Lyon redux

The case of Matthew Lyon shows the dynamic. This from the First Amendment Encyclopedia:
“Lyon won a seat in the U.S. House of Representatives in 1796. He aimed most of his attacks at President John Adams and wrote a series of public letters that attacked Adams for seeking power, thirsting for pomp and adulation, demonstrating avarice, and dismissing meritorious men from office because of their independence of thought.

“Vermont Federalists charged Lyon with being criminally guilty of acting in opposition to the President. On October 6, 1798, Lyon was arrested. The warrant charged that he was “a malicious and seditious person, and of a depraved mind and a wicked and diabolical disposition.”

“Lyon had difficulty finding an attorney...Lyon acted as his own attorney during the trial that began on October 9. He challenged the constitutionality of the Sedition Act on the grounds that it violated the First Amendment’s protection of freedom of speech.

“The jury deliberated for an hour before finding Lyon guilty. The judge sentenced him to four months’ imprisonment and to further confinement until he had paid the costs of the prosecution and a fine of $1,000.

“Instead of silencing Lyon, prison made a martyr of him. After forcing Lyon to take a circuitous route to the jail in order to display him triumphantly before the town citizens, the marshal assigned Lyon to a common cell that he shared with many other inmates.
“The people of western Vermont responded to all of this by giving Lyon a landslide victory in his reelection campaign.”

Dems are trying to disqualify Trump—like how Obama won his IL Senate seat by disqualifying all his opponents on filing irregularities

The basic undeniable fact is that Dems fear that a majority of Americans may give Trump 270 electoral votes thereby making him President again. The Dems are trying to DQ him so the American people cannot do that.

How about PERSUADING voters not to vote for Trump rather than BANNING them from voting for him?

The obvious alternative, which America accepted once and would accept again, is to persuade the voters to vote for the Dem nominee. But Dems are afraid they might lose a democratic persuasion competition. So they are causing zillions of Americans to use phrases like “Soviet justice” and “Third World” justice to describe the NYC indictment.
Putin’s most popular opponent is Alexei Navalny. He is in a Russian prison. The current president of Brazil recently got out of prison.

I cannot see America putting up with this

I do not know the percentage of Trump haters in the US is. There is nothing that can be done to Trump they would not celebrate. But some percentage of America will not accept being PREVENTED from voting for ANYONE in either party—Trump being the current target of such being irrelevant.
The issue now is not Trump. It is whether the US is the Constitutional nation it has been until Trump became president, or is it another Third World or Communist dictatorship that imprisons opponents of the party in power?

The dog who caught the car

The Democrats remind of the dog who caught the car. Dogs love to bark at departing cars implying they are going to really sock it to the car if they catch it. What exactly do the Dems think is going to happen if they finally get this Trump DQ they have been seeking for years? The Third World, unAmerican nature of this could produce a voter backlash to end all backlashes in the next federal election. A mirror image of the 1932 election is a possibility.

Motions and delay

I am not a lawyer but I have represented myself in court for going on 52 years. There will initially be a motion to dismiss filed by Trump bsed on statute of limitations having expired and maybe some sort of lack of jurisdiction because the Manhattan DA is proceeding on a case based on FEDERAL election law. I have experience arguing state law in federal court. That is called pendent jurisdiction. But I never heard of arguing federal law in state court.
No cause of action might also be cited. The “crime” supposedly was paying hush money—not illegal, just a common out-of-court settlement pattern—and calling it a legal expense of the campaign. Is that a legal expense? I do not know that law. It may not ever have been argued and defined by a court opinion.

If the motion to dismiss is not granted, there may be a summary judgment motion by Trump based on no dispute about the facts—only about legal niceties.
Then there is delay. Election day is 11/5/24. Many opportunities for delay are available to Trump. I suspect the remaining days until election day is already less than the indictment-til-trial average time now in NYC.
Another effect may be that GOP pulls back on the going after Hunter and Biden to avoid distracting from the Dems twisting slowly slowly in the Third World wind.
One reader said the problem it is political. There is no legal prohibition against prosecutions that benefit a particular candidate or party. Virtually all litigation has outside-the-court-room benefits and disadvantages for non-parties. The question in court is whether the indictment has legal merit. Good chance it could be thrown out not because it was political, but because the political motive blinded the prosecutor to his own convoluted, tortured, insufficient path to claiming a crime that he could prosecute.

Share this post

← Older Post Newer Post →

Leave a comment

Please note, comments must be approved before they are published.