Tag Archives: indictments

Are we headed for the crapper?

I am going to refuse to believe this great nation of ours is going to elect someone who stands a better than decent chance of being convicted of a felony.

Thus, the crapper destination is not in our nation’s future. Or so my gut is telling me.

I see the polling data that tell me the incumbent president, Joe Biden, trails his likely Republican opponent. I also notice that the polls also show the two men within striking distance of each other. The data all contain a “margin of error” that varies from 3 to 6 percentage points.

OK, I am not going to rely on polls to buoy my spirits. They can change. They can be wrong.

What does lift my spirits is my undying belief in the intelligence of average Americans. And I am not going to include the MAGA nimrods who comprise the bulk of the base that continues to support the former Liar in Chief in my category of “average American.” They ain’t average. Not by a long shot.

I want to harken back to the ex-POTUS’s inaugural speech on Jan. 20, 2017. Do you recall the most memorable line from that speech? To me it was: “The American carnage stops right here, right now.”

Did it stop? No. It didn’t! No president should make such a prediction knowing he cannot make it happen because he says it.

It was just one of many promises this dipsh** made that he didn’t keep. Now he’s running for a third time. It’s all different now. Forget the two impeachments. He stands as a four-times-indicted criminal defendant awaiting trial for an assortment of felonies he has been accused of committing.

I am going to lay my faith at the feet of American voters who cannot stomach the notion of electing a potentially convicted criminal to the nation’s highest office.

We are better than that. We are definitely better than the candidate.

Why not debate ’em … Trump?

You know, it doesn’t really matter to me whether Donald J. Trump will be on a Republican Party primary presidential debate stage with the other guys who want to knock him off.

Truth is, I don’t give a royal rat’s rear end about Trump, or today’s version of the GOP. However, his reported absence from the upcoming debate stage does pose a question or two for me, which I would like to speak to briefly. So … I will.

Some of the GOP frontrunner’s foes are taking aim at him. Mike Pence, Chris Christie, Asa Hutchinson all have spoken critically of him, his conduct, his lack of “vision” for the future.

I want someone to ask Trump this question: What in the world do you have in the way of agenda for the next four years and beyond? This individual has none. He doesn’t speak to the future. Instead, he chooses to relitigate the 2020 election … which he lost to President Biden!

Let’s not be coy, either, about the indictments. He’s got four of them stacked up, waiting for trials. The feds have indicted him twice; two states, New York and Georgia, have indicted twice as well.

Trump can spare us all the BS about “not wanting to elevate” the others’ standing. The truth is he has no solutions. He cannot speak coherently about the future. He vows to be his fans’ “retribution.”

He is the frontrunner among the MAGA morons who dominate the GOP. And why is that? Because his “base” is too damn ignorant and gullible to realize how seriously damaged he has become and how much damage he brings to a once-great political party.

OK, I fibbed about not giving a “rat’s rear end” about Trump. Of course, I do, which is evident in the frequency of my writing about him. I care about Trump’s future only because I love my country and I do not want it sucked down the toilet drain of Donald Trump’s so-called “ideology.”

As to whether he belongs on the stage with the other GOP presidential candidates … sure he does, but only because he needs to be held accountable politically for the nonsense he continues to barf onto the public stage.

Judge hits ‘stand-up double’ with trial ruling

OK, it wasn’t a home run or even a triple, but the judge who is presiding over the classified documents pilfering by Donald J. Trump has issued a ruling that is giving me a glimmer of hope that we can get a trial without bias.

U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, nominated by Donald J. Trump to the federal bench in the final weeks of his term as POTUS, has set a May 20 trial date in Fort Pierce, Fla., on the indictment alleging that Trump broke the law by squirreling away classified documents in his Florida mansion.

Special counsel Jack Smith’s team of federal prosecutor’s wanted to stage the trial in December; Trump’s team wanted an indefinite delay. Cannon split the difference — more or less — by setting the May date. Frankly, it appears to favor Smith’s side of the argument.

The New York trial in which Trump was indicted for the hush money payment to adult film star Stormy Daniels will have concluded. Trump might get convicted of violating state law in spending campaign money keep Daniels quiet about a tryst she says occurred, but which Trump denies … go figure on that one!

The Republican Party presidential primary season will be all but over when Cannon commences the documents trial. Trump remains the favorite for the GOP nomination.

If it concludes prior to the start of the GOP convention, and Trump is convicted of federal felonies (which many observers believe is a probability), then delegates get to decide whether they want to nominate a convicted felon for POTUS.

The ex-POTUS’s legal difficulties are mounting seemingly by the hour, which makes me wonder — and I am serious about this — whether he’ll be able to continue to mount a political campaign while seeking to keep his sorry backside out of prison.

I get that Cannon should have recused herself from this trial, given her conflict of interest in being nominated by the criminal defendant in this case. She hasn’t. She likely won’t.

So, we are left then to hope she does right by the judicial system she serves. It looks to me as if setting the trial date is a step toward correctness.


Walls closing in — again!

I heard it said today that federal prosecutors would “rather not bring a case than bring one that they cannot prove beyond a reasonable doubt.”

With that in mind, I am astonished today to learn that special counsel Jack Smith well might have the goods to drop on Donald John Trump as he concludes his probe into the 1/6 insurrection and assault on the federal government that sought to overturn the 2020 presidential election … which Trump lost to Joseph R. Biden Jr.

I say “astonished” not because I am surprised, but because I am overwhelmed by the gravity of what I now expect to happen.

Which is that Smith is going to indict Trump on a whole array of charges, which might include conspiracy to commit sedition, obstruction of justice and Lord knows what else.

Trump revealed over the weekend that he got a “target letter” from Smith, acknowledging that the special counsel has targeted the former president in his criminal probe.

Oh, brother.

What’s important to note there is that this case will not be tried by the same federal judge — Aileen Cannon — who is thought to favor Trump, who nominated her for the federal judgeship. It will fall onto the lap of another jurist. Cannon is presiding in south Florida over the case involving the classified documents — for which Trump has been indicted.

We are about to enter some mighty rough waters, ladies and gentlemen. Strap yourselves in.


Race to make history?

One of three people appears set to make history by being the first individual ever to indict a former president of the United States.

Who will get there first?

Will it be U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland, Fulton County, Ga., District Attorney Fani Willis or Manhattan, N.Y., District Attorney Alvin Bragg?

I won’t lay down a wager. One of ’em appears set to pull the proverbial trigger on Donald J. Trump. That would be DA Bragg, who appears ready to issue an indictment alleging that a $130,000 hush money payment to a porn star from Trump wasn’t properly reported by the Trump Organization.

Whoever goes first well might give the other two political cover to act as they should and indict the former POTUS for, oh, let’s see: inciting the 1/6 insurrection, squirreling classified documents from the White House illegally at his glitzy joint in south Florida, seeking to overturn 2020 presidential election results by demanding that Georgia officials “find” enough votes to turn the state’s electoral college tally to Trump’s favor.

All of those allegations appear solid to me. However, it’s no one’s call except for the prosecutors who are examining this stuff.

The ex-POTUS is heading for some very bad news.


Stay tuned, my friend; it’s gonna get hairy!

This post is dedicated to my friend and former colleague, a fellow I have known for 22 years who has contended ever since Donald Trump’s first impeachment that the former POTUS needs to be hauled away in cuffs and leg irons.

It looks as though the good guys are gunning for Trump and will issue indictments for criminal conduct. That is my message to my friend, Peter, who lives far away in Australia but who is following the machinations of the American political and judicial systems as closely as any American I know.

The House select committee appears ready to issue referrals for indictments based on Trump’s incitement of the 1/6 assault on our Capitol Building. The attorney general’s office has handed over investigations into the insurrection and the pilfering of classified documents from the White House as Trump was leaving the place for his refuge in Florida to a special counsel who is moving at breakneck speed to finish what the DOJ has begun.

The Fulton County (Ga.) district attorney is working on her own probe into whether Trump violated state law by pressuring Georgia elections officials to “find” enough votes to give the state’s Electoral College votes to Trump rather than to Joe Biden, who them in the 2020 presidential election.

This is all getting quite dicey for the ex-president.

They won’t slap the cuffs on him when the indictments arrive. Thus, my friend might be disappointed that Trump isn’t hauled away in a paddy wagon. I wasn’t prepared to say that indictments are a sure thing. They’re looking more certain all the time.


Will Trumpism outlive its founder?

It has been said by more than one commentator that the movement Donald J. Trump spawned will live long past the time he no longer is a political factor.

Pardon the skepticism, but I don’t think that’s necessarily the case.

I’ll start with this notion: I have doubt that Donald Trump is (a) going to run for the Republican presidential nomination in 2024 and (b) that the GOP has gone totally braindead to nominate him if he does enter the fray.

The Republican Party has shown itself in the past, oh, six years to be a party full of gullible numbskulls who are willing to swallow the swill delivered by Trump. They ignore the threat he continues to pose to our democratic process; they give him a pass on the idiocy that flies out of his mouth; they proclaim a desire to “defund the FBI” after the feds find top-secret documents squirreled away in his Florida home.

So, what is going to happen to Trump’s movement — his cult — once he’s no longer a political player. The way I see it, and I’ll admit it is from the cheap seats, whatever “movement” that Trump has stoked will disappear. Why keep telling The Big Lie about a “stolen election” if the Main Man is no longer calling the shots?

I am going to hold tightly onto my own hope that the law’s lengthy arm is going to corral The Donald sometime soon. The Justice Department is examining whether Trump broke the law in taking those classified documents from the White House; the House select 1/6 committee is considering whether to ask for indictment related to the insurrection that Trump clearly incited; the Fulton County (Ga.) district attorney is looking into whether Trump broke state election laws by demanding that officials “find” enough votes to overturn that state’s 2020 presidential election result.

Oh, and the New York attorney general already has filed a $250 million lawsuit against the Trump Organization for allegedly falsifying its worth to obtain favorable loans.

We have, as they said in a movie, “a target-rich environment.”

The cult leader, it appears to me, is going down in flames. May the fire consume what is left of the movement that bears his name.


Why are we waiting to indict?

Donald Trump’s legal difficulties should not be seen as some sort of uniquely American experience.

Other nations’ former presidents have been arrested, tried, convicted and sent to prison for their crimes. How is it that Donald Trump so far has avoided being read his Miranda rights, forced to don the cuffs and marched off to the slammer?

I think it’s because we ourselves as a nation that treats defendants with dignity. We don’t rush to arrest someone formerly in power. We are an “indispensable nation” that values the “rule of law.”

It’s fair to ask whether Donald Trump would treat other defendants with dignity. Or would he lead campaign rally cheers to “lock him up”?

We all know the answer.

Still, I get the feeling that time is not necessarily Donald Trump’s friend.


Do they really mean ‘civil war’?

What in the name of certifiable insanity is happening along the rightward fringe of political discourse, with individuals and groups yammering about the prospects of “civil war” if certain events don’t go the way they want them to go?

There well could be multiple indictments coming from at least two states, and the U.S. Department of Justice over the conduct of the most recent former president of the United States. Donald Trump’s cult followers are vowing to take to the streets. They will exact revenge if their leader faces criminal prosecution.

Some of ’em have said they expect a civil war to erupt. What the … ?

Hey, we all know what happened when we had a Civil War in this country. Six hundred thousand Americans died on battlefields throughout much of the eastern United States. The war ended. President Lincoln vowed to bind the wounds that tore us apart … only to be assassinated.

Now some among us are predicting a return to that horrifying chapter in our national history. And why? Because the Justice Department is doing its job in accordance with federal law and the U.S. Constitution.

Oh, and then we have two states — Georgia and New York — looking as well into possible criminal behavior. They, too, are operating legally and ethically in the search for the truth.

Oh, my. These threats frighten the daylights out of me.


Is that all there is? Yep, that’s it!

The Wall Street Journal, a longtime champion of conservative causes and those who promote them, wants to know why all the fuss over the FBI search of Donald Trump’s home in search of incriminating evidence.

The Journal, owned by Trump sycophant Rupert Murdoch, questions the release of the heavily redacted affidavit that gave FBI permission to go through Trump’s posh estate.

The newspaper editorializes: It’s possible the redactions in the 38-page document release contain some undisclosed bombshell. But given the contours of what the affidavit and attachments reveal, this really does seem to boil down to a fight over the handling of classified documents. The affidavit’s long introduction and other unredacted paragraphs all point to concern by the FBI and the National Archives with the documents Mr. Trump retained at Mar-a-Lago and his lack of cooperation in not returning all that the feds wanted.

I have to ask: Why question the motive behind the search … and no, I will not call it a “raid”?

There remains a lot behind those redacted passages we don’t understand. There might be the ol’ smoking gun in there. But from what I have been able to glean so far, the FBI said it had enough evidence of “probable cause” that a crime has been committed on Trump’s property. Hell, there might even have been crimes committed within the White House.

The release of the redacted affidavit is enough to persuade me that the federal government appears set to prepare an indictment or maybe two or three against — oh, you know — someone very high up in the government.