Hey folks, let\u2019s be clear about one thing.\u00a0\u00a0Trump is under two federal indictments and one, soon to be two more state indictments; all during an election year.\u00a0\u00a0But it isn\u2019t going to matter.\u00a0\u00a0Even if he is convicted on all of those counts, he still could be elected President.\u00a0\u00a0He wouldn\u2019t be the first to run for President from behind bars. Socialist Eugene Debs ran from the Atlanta Penitentiary in 1920, and got almost a million votes.\u00a0\u00a0And for those of you who think, surely the United States wouldn\u2019t elect an orange man in an orange jump suit as President. How sure are you?\u00a0\u00a0We didn\u2019t think the US could elect a reality show \u201cstar\u201d who \u201cgrabbed them wherever\u201d, either.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Some take solace in the Federalist Society lawyers who say we can apply a Fourteenth Amendment prohibition to the twice-impeached, thrice (so far) indicted former President:\u00a0\u00a0I wish it were so.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cNo person shall\u2026hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States\u2026to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof\u201d(Section 3, 14th<\/sup> Amendment, US Constitution).<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n We might all agree that Trump meets the \u201ccommon\u201d definition of giving aid to insurrectionists. But none of the charges, Federal or State, specifically use the terms \u201cinsurrection or rebellion\u201d.\u00a0\u00a0The Federal charges in Washington, DC, are \u201cnormal\u201d charges of conspiracy to defraud and obstruction of government.\u00a0\u00a0Even Jack Smith\u2019s final charge of taking away citizens\u2019 rights to vote (a violation of the same 14th<\/sup>\u00a0Amendment) wouldn\u2019t necessarily be covered by the disqualification section.<\/p>\n\n\n\n And which Court is going to apply the disqualification to him? When the case inevitably reaches the Supreme Court, does anyone reasonably believe that the six majority Republican and conservative Justices are going to deny his opportunity to run, or more, reverse his election to office? Unless Jack Smith has a full insurrection and sedition charge still to \u201cdrop\u201d, the 14th<\/sup> Amendment disqualification argument just doesn\u2019t stand: too bad.<\/p>\n\n\n\n What can we expect? There are two elections coming up in 2024, one a primary election where the voters are the \u201chardcore\u201d Party members, and the other a general election where we all take part (I hope). Since the majority of the \u201chardcore\u201d Republicans don\u2019t believe that the 2020 election was \u201clegal\u201d, and think that the \u201cinsurrection\u201d was little more than a \u201cFirst Amendment Event\u201d that got out a control, Trump is good with them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Every time Trump gets another indictment, it solidifies his support among that base.\u00a0\u00a0Every time anyone, especially other Republican candidates for President, say something negative about the candidate who faces criminal charges, the base rallies round the MAGA flag.\u00a0\u00a0And as Donald Trump always says:\u00a0\u00a0better to have bad publicity than no publicity.\u00a0\u00a0Trump is taking up all of the oxygen in the campaign, all of the discussion.\u00a0\u00a0Candidates Asa Hutchinson and\u00a0Vivek Ramaswamy can\u2019t get a word in edgewise.\u00a0\u00a0And Mike Pence, well, he\u2019s a \u201cgreat traitor\u201d in their midst.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So, as crazy as it might sound, indictments probably don\u2019t hurt Donald Trump\u2019s candidacy for the Republican nomination. If he gets that nomination, the general election is different. In a general election, Trump depends on a swath of \u201chold your nose\u201d voters. They don\u2019t like Trump, but don\u2019t like Biden even more. Add in a far-left candidacy with the Green Party, and a \u201cwho-knows\u201d Joe Manchin \u201cNo Labels\u201d candidacy, and the binary choice we made in 2020 isn\u2019t quite as clear.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Many Democrats are willing to \u201croll the dice\u201d on a Biden versus Trump rematch.\u00a0\u00a0Biden\u2019s greatest weaknesses, age and Hunter, are completely cancelled out by a Trump candidacy.\u00a0\u00a0Biden delivered in 2020, why take the chance of a divisive primary with Newsom or Harris or Whitmer; perhaps irretrievably\u00a0\u00a0splitting the Party? (Look at\u00a0\u00a0history:\u00a0\u00a0Reagan challenged Ford in 1976, Kennedy challenged\u00a0\u00a0Carter in 1980.\u00a0\u00a0While both sitting Presidents got the nomination, the other Party won the general election).\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Be careful what you wish for.\u00a0\u00a0Trump MUST run for President.\u00a0\u00a0It\u2019s his best (and perhaps only) way out of jail.\u00a0\u00a0When he\u2019s elected, he can order the Justice Department to drop the charges.\u00a0\u00a0If he\u2019s convicted, he could even go so far as pardoning himself (though that\u2019s a whole other \u201ckettle of fish\u201d legally).\u00a0\u00a0And then there\u2019s that\u00a0\u00a0nagging Department of Justice \u201cpolicy\u201d (not a law) that prevents DoJ from acting within sixty days of an election (that should be called the \u201cComey Rule\u201d).\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Trump\u2019s trial dates,\u00a0both in Florida and in DC, are likely to be in the middle of the primary elections.\u00a0\u00a0Does that count?<\/p>\n\n\n\n You can be sure that Trump wants the \u201cComey Rule\u201d applied, and his lawyers will make the same argument.\u00a0\u00a0They say all of the trials should be delayed. The American people should render the verdict, not in the jury box, but at the ballot box.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Democrats will have to win in 2024 to get the final say.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Solid Base<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Run for Protection<\/h3>\n\n\n\n