A felony conviction may not make much difference in support for a presidential candidate that holds private meetings with donors asking for millions to billions of dollars? Supreme court justices are not at all mollified by disrespectful flag treatments or accepting many large gratuities from wealthy supporters. Corruption is rampant in both parties, but seems more so in the former Republican party.
Sorry to see that state of affairs in our leadership. Can’t see how trust in the system can be restored. Everything is political and politicians are for sale.
So many words, too much waste. Absorbing the daily obscenity of American politics now reaches a previously unknown level of absurdity. The only thing on trial is the ability of the electorate to acknowledge fact-based reality or not. It's simply and incredibly that stupid. The existing generational grasp of the original constitutional concept of "freedom/don't tell me what to do/rule of law/it's a free country" etc. has been diluted beyond a meaningless value or recognition. Remember: The price you pay bears the discount you screamed for. Best of luck with that. Just remember there is a "no return" policy.
Netanyahu is in the process of making mistakes possibly worse than our invasion of Iraq. After Rafah, his deluge may drown more than only him. I don't know if you can do anything or pass anything along, but the hour is very late.
"Chose your enemy wisely, for soon you will be just like him" -Sun Tzu. And who has Netanyahu chosen? What then will become of him and his nation?
A Manhattan jury would find Trump guilty of killing Jimmy Hoffa, sabotaging Amelia Earhart's plane, and kidnapping the Lindbergh baby. See Robert De Niro and the rest of "his" 90% Democrat Manhattan venue. Are there any people paying attention, and who would actually vote for Trump, who expect him to be acquitted? Then will they be "awakened" if he is found guilty, because they could have voted for him with everything he's done in the past, but just can't vote for him now that he is a felon? Unless there are a meaningful number of those, and currently there are none in sight, then the only thing that would move the needle in either direction is an acquittal.
Trump has a better chance of winning the Powerball than of being acquitted, so the only question is if a hung jury will move the needle either direction -if one juror will have a problem with the central argument that the hush money is legally a campaign contribution/expense.
The judge prohibited expert testimony on this key question, which is the only thing that matters to this entire case - was the hush money a valid campaign contribution/expense? Meaning, if Trump had listed it as a campaign expense instead of legal expense, would THAT have been legal. If not - if hush money is not a valid campaign expense by FEC rules - then this case goes away. The fact that a person with experience with the FEC was NOT allowed to testify that hush money is NOT a valid campaign expense is a clear signal that it probably isn't. Dueling experts, as the judge complained, are what courts are based on, so prohibiting them in this case only serves the prosecution. Jurors sort through dueling experts in many, many, cases, but not in this one.
Should the Biden campaign (or anyone else for that matter) "just assume that Americans will draw the conclusions they should" about Trump, the trial and a possible guilty verdict?
AYFKM??!!
If the vast majority of Americans were remotely capable of drawing the conclusions that they *should* about anything vis a vie Donald Trump, there would be no guilty verdict to contemplate because there would be no trial because Trump would NOT have even come close to being in an election in which to effect illegal influence and commit election fraud in the first freakin' place.
Please. Assuming the American people of today writ large have a lick of sense concerning their own and the country's *real* self-interests is like assuming the GOP will see the error of its ways and, full of contrition, begin supporting candidates who support democracy and the rule of law above all.
Both assumptions are good for a laugh. But nothing else.
My only regret about the trial is that Trump avoided testifying. I don't know who made the final decision, which certainly was a wise one for the defense, but it would have been great to have had Trump face a prosecutor he couldn't face down, from whom he could not run, and who, if he was any good, could have made Trump look like the vile, amoral, vengeful, malicious, small-souled liar and conman he has been all his life.
I'm not greatly concerned about how much a conviction itself will 'move the needle'; I have too much contact with those who would stand by him even if he were revealed as one of the Boys from Brazil to think otherwise. But a conviction will almost certainly push him to do something so beyond the pale that perhaps it will convince enough of them to get him removed from the stage in November. Even that would not get him out of our political hair, but it would remove any chance of his ever occupying the Oval Office again.
As for those 'moderate Republicans' who are now emerging, too late, from their cocoons and appearing to see the full darkness of the star to whom they initially hitched their wagons, I say, Where were you when anyone with any perception of human character could see what this man was and where he would likely lead us if allowed to. Without your misguided help, he never could have gotten into a position to do what he's done and what he might yet do. Your job now is to let the MAGA crowd know without hesitation, moderation, or half-way rhetoric where they are trying to take this nation you all have claimed to so love.
No offense, but I hate it when people assume Trump supporters are "conservative" and those of us Republicans who oppose Trump are "moderates." Media people do this all the time. But the fact is that many of my moderate Republican friends are some of Trump's biggest supporters. Meanwhile it is quite often the strong conservatives who have refused to drink the Trump Kool-Aid. No one is going to confuse Bill Kristol or George Will for a moderate.
When I became active in GOP politics in the middle 1980s, I was shocked to find that for so many Republicans it wasn't the issues that motivated them. It was a feeling of us v. them. The good guys versus the bad guys. They didn't oppose Democrats so much for the issues, but because they viewed Democrats as the enemy. Those are the people today who are fully behind Trump. Not Republicans like me who are in the GOP because of conservative ideas.
I think the correct terminology for most of what is left of the Republican Party, and certainly its MAGA wing, is "Reactionary". "Reactionary" movements usually occur from the "Right", and the "Right" which is often confused with "Conservative".
What is ironic about the time we are in is that true "Conservatives" are being forced to better (re)define what it really means to be "conservative." We on the "left" can experience some schadenfreude from that, after years of having "left", "liberal" and "progressive" conflated with "socialism" and communism" by Republicans. But we better get focused now because the realignment is happening to us all, and we would be wise to regain control of the definition of ourselves too.
I think "authoritarianism" is the best description. Authoritarians can be right or left. Trumpism is completely unconnected to policy positions. They are very flexible on issues. That is why many of us true conservatives despise Trumpism.
I'm not offended, merely misread. I didn't use the word conservative, and I referred only to those moderate Republicans who did initially hitch their wagons to Trump's star but are now turning against him. My central question was why they didn't see initially what they now seem to see.
I'm sure Trump’s lawyers would not allow him to testify. It would be a prosecutor's dream. Trump would stay on track for a few minutes, then the lies and exaggerations would start - piled higher and deeper. And,
Poll privately on the question of whether the hung jury was right or wrong in ending the deliberations that way. Amplify the results if they hurt trump.
Distill the essential points of the prosecution's masterful closing statement and repeat them relentlessly on all platforms. Employ many voices, starting with a real GOAT, Robert DeNiro.
Find out who hung the jury (while respecting the privacy safeguards) and investigate if the trump cabal tampered with that person. If he or she buys a beach-front house in the Hamptons anytime soon, we will know the answer.
“After weeks of trial, a key dispute is still whether the crime charged is even a crime,”
Dear Lord. Falsifying business records is a crime. Brag and/or his office has, according to news outlets, prosecuted hundreds of them. Even is Trump is found guilty of the misdemeanor charges, he is still a convicted business fraud. That, and his Trump University Fraud, his Foundation fraud. He alone can fix it? More like he alone can fraud it.
“I guess because I have so many other things I’m working on,” Trump said. An American is wrongfully imprisoned and he's too busy? What was busy doing? Working on his golf game? This is such an outrageous and damning statement from a former president and someone who seeks the office again. It is a statement screaming his total lack of fitness for the job. Lincoln Project, are you listening?
Falsifying business records is a misdemeanor, and the statute of limitations has run on the charge for a misdemeanor offense. It only is elevated to a felony (and thus still within the statute of limitations) if done to further a second crime. Trump cannot be found guilty on the misdemeanor, it is felonious or nothing; and the dispute as to whether or not it is criminal has to do with whether or not the underlying crimes can legally connect to a New York business records statute.
Agreed. But that goes to whether Trump can be brought to trial, (no due SOL) and also sentencing. Misdemeanor or felony what he did is still a crime (alleged)
I somewhat disagree with the consequences of the jury decision in the NY case: if there is a conviction, that would be helpful to Trump. It would galvanize his base while independents would argue it was a waste of time and resources (crime in NYC is still high, the case was not brought up earlier and so on). If there is a hung jury, both sides would mostly conclude what they want to conclude. There will be almost no consequence on the polls. If there is an acquittal, I agree with Chris Stirewalt that it would be bad for Trump. This is because it would deny the claim the legal system is rigged against MAGA and Trump will talk about it instead of the issues that motivate the voters (remember this is what happened in 2016 after he won the election).
I disagree. I don't think an acquittal or hung jury moves the needle much. By contrast, I think a conviction helps Biden. Will it flip many Trump voters? Probably not.
But leaners? Yep. The ones leaning to Biden are now firmly pro Biden. The Trump leaners (the "Bannon Line" voters), similarly, are now staying at home. Think of it like this: What job would you hire a convict to do? Would you let a convict be your lawyer? Your doctor? Your accountant? Would you let a convict design a building? Yeah, no.
Also, I think there is a small but not insignificant amount of Trump's base for whom a conviction will depress turnout. A big part of Trump's base appeal is his invincibility. If they grab a woman by the pussy, they get fired, they get arrested, they have a restraining order issued against them. But Trump brags about it in broad daylight. They admire that about him. For them, a conviction dents this invincible image.
Prepare for a hung jury. We've seen this movie so many times (Trump Escapes Consequences) that it should be expected. But it will leave things as they are, neither a net positive or negative regardless of how Trump spins it. It's going to be a long 5 months.
Hung juries occur only about 6% of the time. While I'd place the odds of this case having a hung jury a little higher, I'd still only give it about a 1/10 shot.
Hung juries are something the media loves, b/c they can spin the case however they want to. But they're rare.
“This is bizarre, yet filled with intention. It is designed to make President Joe Biden look weak and to show that Trump is close enough to Putin to gain special—but conditional—treatment from him. Trump is suggesting that he and Putin have a one-sided deal in which he will secure Gershkovich’s return in exchange for, apparently, nothing. But given that Putin is allegedly willing to “do that for me, but not for anyone else,” will Gershkovich continue to languish in a Russian jail if Trump loses the election?”
Of course Putin will release Getshkovich as a gesture of good will, but there will be a cost, just not an obvious one.
I’m sure if Trump wins, Putin and Trump will resume their tête-à-tête, (in secret), and agree to reshape Europe in the mold of the Iron Curtain, except this time, we’ll be aligned with the Soviet Union, not Western Europe.
Clearly, Trump still believes in authoritarian friendships with brutal authoritarian kleptocrats and dictators. The problem is every other leader of a nation, especially the stronger and smart ones, do not!
As Benjamin Disraeli once said, “Countries have no friends only interests.” Can you say Ukraine? No worries, or need; it will soon be a wholly owned subsidiary of Russia Inc.
As for this trial? It doesn’t matter since the lines have already been drawn. Biden needs to focus on the 40 million Americans who aren’t registered, and the right leaning independents who are on the fence.
I honestly don’t believe there is an American in this country who doesn’t know what a morally bankrupt, lying charlatan Trump is; they just don’t care. It’s already baked into the equation, and regardless of the outcome, it won’t move the needle either way.
And if there’s a hung jury, what do we Never Trumpers do?
1. Pour a strong drink.
2. Re-read and take to heart the beginning of Thomas Paine’s first American Crisis pamphlet:
“These are the times that try men’s souls: The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of his country; but he that stands it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly.”
Bill, I have to say you keep chasing the dog. You literally have told Biden over the last 6 months to focus on a 100 different issues. On many issues you have flip flopped.
I have no idea what the strategy should be but we keep changing what issues Biden should focus on and how much he should focus on that said issue.
Unfortunately I have a feeling that our public won’t care about a conviction
A felony conviction may not make much difference in support for a presidential candidate that holds private meetings with donors asking for millions to billions of dollars? Supreme court justices are not at all mollified by disrespectful flag treatments or accepting many large gratuities from wealthy supporters. Corruption is rampant in both parties, but seems more so in the former Republican party.
Sorry to see that state of affairs in our leadership. Can’t see how trust in the system can be restored. Everything is political and politicians are for sale.
So many words, too much waste. Absorbing the daily obscenity of American politics now reaches a previously unknown level of absurdity. The only thing on trial is the ability of the electorate to acknowledge fact-based reality or not. It's simply and incredibly that stupid. The existing generational grasp of the original constitutional concept of "freedom/don't tell me what to do/rule of law/it's a free country" etc. has been diluted beyond a meaningless value or recognition. Remember: The price you pay bears the discount you screamed for. Best of luck with that. Just remember there is a "no return" policy.
Touché !!!
Well said
Hello William Kristol,
Netanyahu is in the process of making mistakes possibly worse than our invasion of Iraq. After Rafah, his deluge may drown more than only him. I don't know if you can do anything or pass anything along, but the hour is very late.
"Chose your enemy wisely, for soon you will be just like him" -Sun Tzu. And who has Netanyahu chosen? What then will become of him and his nation?
A Manhattan jury would find Trump guilty of killing Jimmy Hoffa, sabotaging Amelia Earhart's plane, and kidnapping the Lindbergh baby. See Robert De Niro and the rest of "his" 90% Democrat Manhattan venue. Are there any people paying attention, and who would actually vote for Trump, who expect him to be acquitted? Then will they be "awakened" if he is found guilty, because they could have voted for him with everything he's done in the past, but just can't vote for him now that he is a felon? Unless there are a meaningful number of those, and currently there are none in sight, then the only thing that would move the needle in either direction is an acquittal.
Trump has a better chance of winning the Powerball than of being acquitted, so the only question is if a hung jury will move the needle either direction -if one juror will have a problem with the central argument that the hush money is legally a campaign contribution/expense.
The judge prohibited expert testimony on this key question, which is the only thing that matters to this entire case - was the hush money a valid campaign contribution/expense? Meaning, if Trump had listed it as a campaign expense instead of legal expense, would THAT have been legal. If not - if hush money is not a valid campaign expense by FEC rules - then this case goes away. The fact that a person with experience with the FEC was NOT allowed to testify that hush money is NOT a valid campaign expense is a clear signal that it probably isn't. Dueling experts, as the judge complained, are what courts are based on, so prohibiting them in this case only serves the prosecution. Jurors sort through dueling experts in many, many, cases, but not in this one.
Should the Biden campaign (or anyone else for that matter) "just assume that Americans will draw the conclusions they should" about Trump, the trial and a possible guilty verdict?
AYFKM??!!
If the vast majority of Americans were remotely capable of drawing the conclusions that they *should* about anything vis a vie Donald Trump, there would be no guilty verdict to contemplate because there would be no trial because Trump would NOT have even come close to being in an election in which to effect illegal influence and commit election fraud in the first freakin' place.
Please. Assuming the American people of today writ large have a lick of sense concerning their own and the country's *real* self-interests is like assuming the GOP will see the error of its ways and, full of contrition, begin supporting candidates who support democracy and the rule of law above all.
Both assumptions are good for a laugh. But nothing else.
I am aware of that; however, if Trump’s entire defense team threatened to resign if Trump insisted on testifying, even Trump might see the light.
My only regret about the trial is that Trump avoided testifying. I don't know who made the final decision, which certainly was a wise one for the defense, but it would have been great to have had Trump face a prosecutor he couldn't face down, from whom he could not run, and who, if he was any good, could have made Trump look like the vile, amoral, vengeful, malicious, small-souled liar and conman he has been all his life.
I'm not greatly concerned about how much a conviction itself will 'move the needle'; I have too much contact with those who would stand by him even if he were revealed as one of the Boys from Brazil to think otherwise. But a conviction will almost certainly push him to do something so beyond the pale that perhaps it will convince enough of them to get him removed from the stage in November. Even that would not get him out of our political hair, but it would remove any chance of his ever occupying the Oval Office again.
As for those 'moderate Republicans' who are now emerging, too late, from their cocoons and appearing to see the full darkness of the star to whom they initially hitched their wagons, I say, Where were you when anyone with any perception of human character could see what this man was and where he would likely lead us if allowed to. Without your misguided help, he never could have gotten into a position to do what he's done and what he might yet do. Your job now is to let the MAGA crowd know without hesitation, moderation, or half-way rhetoric where they are trying to take this nation you all have claimed to so love.
No offense, but I hate it when people assume Trump supporters are "conservative" and those of us Republicans who oppose Trump are "moderates." Media people do this all the time. But the fact is that many of my moderate Republican friends are some of Trump's biggest supporters. Meanwhile it is quite often the strong conservatives who have refused to drink the Trump Kool-Aid. No one is going to confuse Bill Kristol or George Will for a moderate.
When I became active in GOP politics in the middle 1980s, I was shocked to find that for so many Republicans it wasn't the issues that motivated them. It was a feeling of us v. them. The good guys versus the bad guys. They didn't oppose Democrats so much for the issues, but because they viewed Democrats as the enemy. Those are the people today who are fully behind Trump. Not Republicans like me who are in the GOP because of conservative ideas.
I think the correct terminology for most of what is left of the Republican Party, and certainly its MAGA wing, is "Reactionary". "Reactionary" movements usually occur from the "Right", and the "Right" which is often confused with "Conservative".
What is ironic about the time we are in is that true "Conservatives" are being forced to better (re)define what it really means to be "conservative." We on the "left" can experience some schadenfreude from that, after years of having "left", "liberal" and "progressive" conflated with "socialism" and communism" by Republicans. But we better get focused now because the realignment is happening to us all, and we would be wise to regain control of the definition of ourselves too.
I think "authoritarianism" is the best description. Authoritarians can be right or left. Trumpism is completely unconnected to policy positions. They are very flexible on issues. That is why many of us true conservatives despise Trumpism.
I'm not offended, merely misread. I didn't use the word conservative, and I referred only to those moderate Republicans who did initially hitch their wagons to Trump's star but are now turning against him. My central question was why they didn't see initially what they now seem to see.
I'm sure Trump’s lawyers would not allow him to testify. It would be a prosecutor's dream. Trump would stay on track for a few minutes, then the lies and exaggerations would start - piled higher and deeper. And,
Trump would dig himself in deeper and deeper.
If he wasn't a coward and wanted to testify, he could have. His lawyer can only advise him not to testify, he can't order him not to.
Exactly.
HAPPY FRIDAY! Have a nice weekend.
(Now they're really confused."
After a hung jury (and that stiff second drink):
Poll privately on the question of whether the hung jury was right or wrong in ending the deliberations that way. Amplify the results if they hurt trump.
Distill the essential points of the prosecution's masterful closing statement and repeat them relentlessly on all platforms. Employ many voices, starting with a real GOAT, Robert DeNiro.
Find out who hung the jury (while respecting the privacy safeguards) and investigate if the trump cabal tampered with that person. If he or she buys a beach-front house in the Hamptons anytime soon, we will know the answer.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c844g02nl18o - Israel expects Gaza war to continue for rest of 2024 - adviser
"A senior Israeli official has said he expects the war against Hamas in Gaza to continue for at least the rest of this year.
"We are expecting another seven months of fighting,” the prime minister’s national security adviser, Tzachi Hanegbi, told Israel's Kan public radio."
“After weeks of trial, a key dispute is still whether the crime charged is even a crime,”
Dear Lord. Falsifying business records is a crime. Brag and/or his office has, according to news outlets, prosecuted hundreds of them. Even is Trump is found guilty of the misdemeanor charges, he is still a convicted business fraud. That, and his Trump University Fraud, his Foundation fraud. He alone can fix it? More like he alone can fraud it.
“I guess because I have so many other things I’m working on,” Trump said. An American is wrongfully imprisoned and he's too busy? What was busy doing? Working on his golf game? This is such an outrageous and damning statement from a former president and someone who seeks the office again. It is a statement screaming his total lack of fitness for the job. Lincoln Project, are you listening?
Falsifying business records is a misdemeanor, and the statute of limitations has run on the charge for a misdemeanor offense. It only is elevated to a felony (and thus still within the statute of limitations) if done to further a second crime. Trump cannot be found guilty on the misdemeanor, it is felonious or nothing; and the dispute as to whether or not it is criminal has to do with whether or not the underlying crimes can legally connect to a New York business records statute.
Agreed. But that goes to whether Trump can be brought to trial, (no due SOL) and also sentencing. Misdemeanor or felony what he did is still a crime (alleged)
I somewhat disagree with the consequences of the jury decision in the NY case: if there is a conviction, that would be helpful to Trump. It would galvanize his base while independents would argue it was a waste of time and resources (crime in NYC is still high, the case was not brought up earlier and so on). If there is a hung jury, both sides would mostly conclude what they want to conclude. There will be almost no consequence on the polls. If there is an acquittal, I agree with Chris Stirewalt that it would be bad for Trump. This is because it would deny the claim the legal system is rigged against MAGA and Trump will talk about it instead of the issues that motivate the voters (remember this is what happened in 2016 after he won the election).
I disagree. I don't think an acquittal or hung jury moves the needle much. By contrast, I think a conviction helps Biden. Will it flip many Trump voters? Probably not.
But leaners? Yep. The ones leaning to Biden are now firmly pro Biden. The Trump leaners (the "Bannon Line" voters), similarly, are now staying at home. Think of it like this: What job would you hire a convict to do? Would you let a convict be your lawyer? Your doctor? Your accountant? Would you let a convict design a building? Yeah, no.
Also, I think there is a small but not insignificant amount of Trump's base for whom a conviction will depress turnout. A big part of Trump's base appeal is his invincibility. If they grab a woman by the pussy, they get fired, they get arrested, they have a restraining order issued against them. But Trump brags about it in broad daylight. They admire that about him. For them, a conviction dents this invincible image.
Prepare for a hung jury. We've seen this movie so many times (Trump Escapes Consequences) that it should be expected. But it will leave things as they are, neither a net positive or negative regardless of how Trump spins it. It's going to be a long 5 months.
Can it be a hung jury on some counts and guilty on other counts?
Hung juries occur only about 6% of the time. While I'd place the odds of this case having a hung jury a little higher, I'd still only give it about a 1/10 shot.
Hung juries are something the media loves, b/c they can spin the case however they want to. But they're rare.
“This is bizarre, yet filled with intention. It is designed to make President Joe Biden look weak and to show that Trump is close enough to Putin to gain special—but conditional—treatment from him. Trump is suggesting that he and Putin have a one-sided deal in which he will secure Gershkovich’s return in exchange for, apparently, nothing. But given that Putin is allegedly willing to “do that for me, but not for anyone else,” will Gershkovich continue to languish in a Russian jail if Trump loses the election?”
Of course Putin will release Getshkovich as a gesture of good will, but there will be a cost, just not an obvious one.
I’m sure if Trump wins, Putin and Trump will resume their tête-à-tête, (in secret), and agree to reshape Europe in the mold of the Iron Curtain, except this time, we’ll be aligned with the Soviet Union, not Western Europe.
Clearly, Trump still believes in authoritarian friendships with brutal authoritarian kleptocrats and dictators. The problem is every other leader of a nation, especially the stronger and smart ones, do not!
As Benjamin Disraeli once said, “Countries have no friends only interests.” Can you say Ukraine? No worries, or need; it will soon be a wholly owned subsidiary of Russia Inc.
As for this trial? It doesn’t matter since the lines have already been drawn. Biden needs to focus on the 40 million Americans who aren’t registered, and the right leaning independents who are on the fence.
I honestly don’t believe there is an American in this country who doesn’t know what a morally bankrupt, lying charlatan Trump is; they just don’t care. It’s already baked into the equation, and regardless of the outcome, it won’t move the needle either way.
IMHO…:)
Per Bill Kristol:
And if there’s a hung jury, what do we Never Trumpers do?
1. Pour a strong drink.
2. Re-read and take to heart the beginning of Thomas Paine’s first American Crisis pamphlet:
“These are the times that try men’s souls: The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of his country; but he that stands it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly.”
3. Pour another drink.
Thank you, Bill, for the good advice.
Bill, I have to say you keep chasing the dog. You literally have told Biden over the last 6 months to focus on a 100 different issues. On many issues you have flip flopped.
I have no idea what the strategy should be but we keep changing what issues Biden should focus on and how much he should focus on that said issue.
Unfortunately I have a feeling that our public won’t care about a conviction