Guilty on all countsPosted By Rod Kaufman |
While I agree about the pro-Trump and anti-Trump voter sentiments, I do hope that the polling regarding the margins in the Republican party not voting for Trump as a result a verdict of GUILTY in THIRTY FOUR FELONY counts will become a consistent trend.Originally Posted by James Brown
I am also questioning, as I have from the day Trump was indicted, whether this political prosecution will backlash to guarantee Trump's victory.
The risk of backlash seems extreme to me. Where is the upside for the Democrats? The entire country already knew Trump had an affair with Stormy Daniels and that his disbarred fixer paid her hush money. The underlying facts should surprise exactly no one. In my opinion, the criminal act of booking these payments to Cohen as "attorney fees" rather than "hush money payments to porn star" will be pretty small potatoes in the minds of voters. This sort of thing presumably happens in many campaigns. I doubt HRC's campaign booked the payments to Perkins Coie as, "reimbursement through shell companies for fictitious dossier used to smear opponent before and after election." Obviously, she was not prosecuted under this arcane statute and never would be in blue NY. Also I've mentioned my own reservations about this particular law. I expect in the minds of many non-lawyer voters in swing states the thought will be, "so that is a felony in NY? Hmmm."
So, even though the prosecution was legal, I still think it was a horrible idea. The people who hate Trump get a moment of euphoria. The people who love Trump are energized even more than before. Will any of the elusive persuadable voters in the 6 or 7 swing states that will decide this election be persuaded one way or the other? That is the question.
I am aware of the polling that says a felony conviction will make a difference with some voters. That polling is kind of dated now that a conviction is real as opposed to hypothetical, and I think a conviction for a more relevant crime (i.e. the Federal prosecutions) would be more persuasive to persuadable voters.
Bottom line, I think this prosecution was a horrible idea because I think the risk of backlash catapulting Trump back into the White House is greater than any possibility this particular felony conviction (for stuff everyone already knew about) is going to resurrect the Biden campaign. Jim
That said, I think you're trivializing what Trump did which, in essence, was to do what he usually does, i.e. deceiving the electorate with his lies and corrupt acts.
And, of course, he'll continue to do so if re-elected by eliminating the remaining cases against him and freeing the Jan 6th "patriots" who were found guilty of serious crimes by a jury of their peers with the latter action seriously undermining the rule of law and the integrity of our judicial system.
Frankly, I'm shocked that you're calling this a "political prosecution" which is the same sort of unhinged nonsense spouting out of Trump's mouth. He was indicted after an investigation by a grand jury, prosecuted justly under the laws of the state of his residence and found guilty by a jury of his peers. But, as per your statement to the contrary, it's a "political prosecution" and in doing so, you've obviated our system to the same level as Trump.
And I certainly disagree with the whatraboutsism comparo between Hillary Clinton and Trump. They're nowhere near in equivalence and I'll remind you of the nonsense with Hillary's emails shortly before the election that helped sink her campaign while Trump and his family did similar with classified emails on their cells while in office.
What is happening now is another example of the existential threat to democracy and the rule of law that Trump truly poses as he and his Republican supporters in congress lie and rail against the guilty verdicts and call the system unfair, fascist and corrupt.
