Donald Trump has finally been subjected to the rule of law. We should appreciate this moment and understand that, whatever the outcome, the system worked.
The system worked in one out of four. Batting .250 nowadays will keep you in the major leagues, if you have power. We must keep the guilty felon out of power.
I’m still mystified, and a bit irked, that it was apparently impossible to get “everyone” (i.e. NYT, WaPo etc) to call this case what it was: ELECTION INTERFERENCE. Yes, hush money was involved, but the reason for those payments was to keep the story out of the public eye, for the sake of INTERFERING IN THE ELECTION!!!!!
Almost as soon as I heard the news, I went on the WaPo website to see the rejoicing.
One commenter simply wrote out the first verse of the Battle Hymn of the Republic, which I at first thought a little strange. Then I read them, and can understand how that seemed just the right thing to do:
Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord
He is trampling out the vintage where the grapes of wrath are stored
He hath loosed the fateful lightning of His terrible swift sword
I am wondering if people are REALLY ready for the shitstorm that is going to come down if Trump loses in November. I am really wondering if the government and Justice Department are going to be ready.
Because Coup 2.0is going to make Coup 1.0 look like a damp squib going off under a bucket covered by sandbags in comparison. Donnie does NOT want to go to jail.
Justice is in progress, it will not have been done if he wins in November.
The unanimous conviction of Donald Trump on all counts is equal to or greater than the Nixon Watergate resignation of 45 years ago, which I also lived through. Does any American actually think voters in Nov. will return a convicted felon to the White House. No way!
The big difference is - and it is a big one - is the GOP are not in charge of the White House, or the Senate. You can be confident that plans are already in place. The National Guard will be present at Capitol Hill. It doesn't mean there won't be some mayhem.
It's a great day. Finally. It will be interesting to see what the sentence will be. Donny Diaperstain may be a first time offender as far as a criminal court goes, but he's far from a first time offender. He's been criming all his life, and he was convicted in two civil suits in the past few months.
The walls are closing in, scumbag. And when you lose in November, those other charges you face, the truly serious ones? You're going down. It won't be the White House you reside in, it will be the Big House.
The gravity of a guilty conviction will have already been dissected by DJT team as they poise their avalanche of deceitful misinformation for a full media flooding. True, the legal process has been upheld but it's the penalty phase that should resound a clarion call across this land, but it won't. Expect the thin gruel of a few months house arrest at Mar-a Lago to be served up.
We shall see. Given the abuse Von Shitzinpantz has served up toward the judge, his family, the jury, Bragg, the prosecution etc., I would hope that Merchan will want to send a message. Clearly, given the quick turnaround, the jury had no issues with the case and evidence presented. I can't see an appeals court overturning this.
One irony of this saga is that MAGAs keep claiming that the 2020 election was rigged against Trump first of all by "media censorship," and in particular by the brief suppression on one platform of a link to one article that allegedly would have turned the whole election - though the story was not actually buried. But they find nothing troubling in the Trump-Pecker scheme to bury stories unfavorable to Trump and make it illegal for those stories to be told in other outlets.
People who screech about "fake news" are not offended that their god-king actually contrived to have fake news planted in a publication that is conspicuously displayed at grocery stores and CVS & Walgreens across the country.
The foes of "censorship" are uncritical of the very strict NDAs that Trump has boasted about imposing.
Perhaps most ironic is that most Trump voters turn out to be not at all bothered by the moral sleaziness that Trump was trying to hide. The most devoted Trumpites appear to regard it as a strength.
JVL, agreed. And if the jury is hung - which I think it the most likely outcome, sadly - by one lone wolf Trump supporter with an OAN mindset - even then, that would mean 11 to 1 the jurors wanted to convict, on most if not all counts, and in any case the system worked, as best as could be expected with a national jury pool that has been systematically poisoned by Fox, Trump, OAN and legions of far-right opportunists and professional rage merchants.
"But whatever comes next, people who are committed to the rule of law should be satisfied that while we may not get the outcome we prefer, or think is correct, the system worked as designed.
This is what justice looks like. And when you pledge your fealty to the rule of law, that has to be enough."
I'm going to reserve the right to disagree depending on what happens next. The system may still be working according to the letter of the law in this one case in NYC but if it becomes clear the inputs, process, or aggregate outputs are no longer what was intended in the system specs then, no, it will not be enough for me. That doesn't mean I riot on a hung jury. But if we get Judge Cannon level bullshit in the appeal that leads to an acquital, for instance, I'm not going to accept that system has any real use other than to stack the deck against me.
"[The trial] was about the commission of election fraud:"
Note the radical difference: Most of us Never-Trumpers oppose election fraud, and admit what it is, no matter who commits it. But sadly we must admit that many Never-Trumpers do think it's never fraud if committed by or for their candidate, but "may be" if the same acts are committed by or for the opposing candidate. But among die-hard Trumpers it's on a whole other level. Nothing committed by or for him is ever election fraud, and everything by or for the opposing candidate is. Though some may grudgingly admit that Michael Cohen committed it for Trump (but that Trump, whom they claim never lets anything happen without his approval somehow let this one slip by). But they hate Cohen not because of that, but because he abandoned their "savior."
Note: I considered using the word "attempted" instead of "committed" because as I understand it, the attempt alone is fraud, even if it is unsuccessful at changing the election outcome. And it is not known whether these actions affected the 2016 election. But there too is a stark difference. Few if any Never-Trumpers are claiming it did, while millions of Trumpers are still insisting - without evidence - that the Democrats didn't just commit fraud, but in fact "stole" the 2020 election!
I'm terribly sorry to be pedantic, but I think the first sentence of this newsletter just sounds wrong. "The first criminal trial of Donald Trump and was everything that a society committed to the rule of law can hope for." What is "and" doing in that sentence? The sentence would read fine without it: "The first criminal trial of Donald Trump was everything that a society committed to the rule of law can hope for." Or, if there were a couple of other words added: "The first criminal trial of Donald Trump has gone to the jury and it was everything that a society committed to the rule of law can hope for." or "The first criminal trial of Donald Trump is done and it was everything that a society committed to the rule of law can hope for." Something needs to be added or the "and" needs to be removed, but it just sounds wrong the way it is written.
The system worked in one out of four. Batting .250 nowadays will keep you in the major leagues, if you have power. We must keep the guilty felon out of power.
I’m still mystified, and a bit irked, that it was apparently impossible to get “everyone” (i.e. NYT, WaPo etc) to call this case what it was: ELECTION INTERFERENCE. Yes, hush money was involved, but the reason for those payments was to keep the story out of the public eye, for the sake of INTERFERING IN THE ELECTION!!!!!
Almost as soon as I heard the news, I went on the WaPo website to see the rejoicing.
One commenter simply wrote out the first verse of the Battle Hymn of the Republic, which I at first thought a little strange. Then I read them, and can understand how that seemed just the right thing to do:
Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord
He is trampling out the vintage where the grapes of wrath are stored
He hath loosed the fateful lightning of His terrible swift sword
His truth is marching on!
Just replace “Lord” with “Law”!
Wow. I was astonished the jury came back so fast, what with 34 counts to cover. And a guilty verdict on every one.
The prosecution did a fantastic job.
I am wondering if people are REALLY ready for the shitstorm that is going to come down if Trump loses in November. I am really wondering if the government and Justice Department are going to be ready.
Because Coup 2.0is going to make Coup 1.0 look like a damp squib going off under a bucket covered by sandbags in comparison. Donnie does NOT want to go to jail.
Justice is in progress, it will not have been done if he wins in November.
The unanimous conviction of Donald Trump on all counts is equal to or greater than the Nixon Watergate resignation of 45 years ago, which I also lived through. Does any American actually think voters in Nov. will return a convicted felon to the White House. No way!
About 30% or so do not believe that he is a felon, only that he is being persecuted by the corrupt Deep State and Democratic Party.
The big difference is - and it is a big one - is the GOP are not in charge of the White House, or the Senate. You can be confident that plans are already in place. The National Guard will be present at Capitol Hill. It doesn't mean there won't be some mayhem.
Trump is going to lose, just like he did today.
It's a great day. Finally. It will be interesting to see what the sentence will be. Donny Diaperstain may be a first time offender as far as a criminal court goes, but he's far from a first time offender. He's been criming all his life, and he was convicted in two civil suits in the past few months.
The walls are closing in, scumbag. And when you lose in November, those other charges you face, the truly serious ones? You're going down. It won't be the White House you reside in, it will be the Big House.
Jury just served up some justice. HOT plates of justice.
NOW justice has been done!
Guilty on all charges!
Justice REALLY HAS BEEN DONE, JVL.
The gravity of a guilty conviction will have already been dissected by DJT team as they poise their avalanche of deceitful misinformation for a full media flooding. True, the legal process has been upheld but it's the penalty phase that should resound a clarion call across this land, but it won't. Expect the thin gruel of a few months house arrest at Mar-a Lago to be served up.
We shall see. Given the abuse Von Shitzinpantz has served up toward the judge, his family, the jury, Bragg, the prosecution etc., I would hope that Merchan will want to send a message. Clearly, given the quick turnaround, the jury had no issues with the case and evidence presented. I can't see an appeals court overturning this.
One irony of this saga is that MAGAs keep claiming that the 2020 election was rigged against Trump first of all by "media censorship," and in particular by the brief suppression on one platform of a link to one article that allegedly would have turned the whole election - though the story was not actually buried. But they find nothing troubling in the Trump-Pecker scheme to bury stories unfavorable to Trump and make it illegal for those stories to be told in other outlets.
People who screech about "fake news" are not offended that their god-king actually contrived to have fake news planted in a publication that is conspicuously displayed at grocery stores and CVS & Walgreens across the country.
The foes of "censorship" are uncritical of the very strict NDAs that Trump has boasted about imposing.
Perhaps most ironic is that most Trump voters turn out to be not at all bothered by the moral sleaziness that Trump was trying to hide. The most devoted Trumpites appear to regard it as a strength.
Fake News is okay if it is YOUR Fake News. In fact, it is required.
JVL, agreed. And if the jury is hung - which I think it the most likely outcome, sadly - by one lone wolf Trump supporter with an OAN mindset - even then, that would mean 11 to 1 the jurors wanted to convict, on most if not all counts, and in any case the system worked, as best as could be expected with a national jury pool that has been systematically poisoned by Fox, Trump, OAN and legions of far-right opportunists and professional rage merchants.
Well, you, like the rest of us, must be pretty happy today!
Happy and amazed! So he’s not the Teflon Don, after all!
"But whatever comes next, people who are committed to the rule of law should be satisfied that while we may not get the outcome we prefer, or think is correct, the system worked as designed.
This is what justice looks like. And when you pledge your fealty to the rule of law, that has to be enough."
I'm going to reserve the right to disagree depending on what happens next. The system may still be working according to the letter of the law in this one case in NYC but if it becomes clear the inputs, process, or aggregate outputs are no longer what was intended in the system specs then, no, it will not be enough for me. That doesn't mean I riot on a hung jury. But if we get Judge Cannon level bullshit in the appeal that leads to an acquital, for instance, I'm not going to accept that system has any real use other than to stack the deck against me.
"[The trial] was about the commission of election fraud:"
Note the radical difference: Most of us Never-Trumpers oppose election fraud, and admit what it is, no matter who commits it. But sadly we must admit that many Never-Trumpers do think it's never fraud if committed by or for their candidate, but "may be" if the same acts are committed by or for the opposing candidate. But among die-hard Trumpers it's on a whole other level. Nothing committed by or for him is ever election fraud, and everything by or for the opposing candidate is. Though some may grudgingly admit that Michael Cohen committed it for Trump (but that Trump, whom they claim never lets anything happen without his approval somehow let this one slip by). But they hate Cohen not because of that, but because he abandoned their "savior."
Note: I considered using the word "attempted" instead of "committed" because as I understand it, the attempt alone is fraud, even if it is unsuccessful at changing the election outcome. And it is not known whether these actions affected the 2016 election. But there too is a stark difference. Few if any Never-Trumpers are claiming it did, while millions of Trumpers are still insisting - without evidence - that the Democrats didn't just commit fraud, but in fact "stole" the 2020 election!
I'm terribly sorry to be pedantic, but I think the first sentence of this newsletter just sounds wrong. "The first criminal trial of Donald Trump and was everything that a society committed to the rule of law can hope for." What is "and" doing in that sentence? The sentence would read fine without it: "The first criminal trial of Donald Trump was everything that a society committed to the rule of law can hope for." Or, if there were a couple of other words added: "The first criminal trial of Donald Trump has gone to the jury and it was everything that a society committed to the rule of law can hope for." or "The first criminal trial of Donald Trump is done and it was everything that a society committed to the rule of law can hope for." Something needs to be added or the "and" needs to be removed, but it just sounds wrong the way it is written.