America's future, the short and the long, macro and micro, at stake in 2024 updated 9/30/23, 10/2/23

 Upated 10/2/23 The strongest argument Democrats have on their behalf in 2024 is a choice in the short term between chaos and control by the "clown show" of the MAGAs in the House and a second-term Trump, or will it be a choice for a candidate, including the Biden, striving for more peace and prosperity and the rule of law.

 With a Trump victory, it is chaos and conflict, a country tied up in knots by a party and its leader bent on revenge, ginning up racial and cultural conflicts, and consolidation of power in one man's hands  who believes that violence is an acceptable tool to advance its agenda. Trump is openly calling for political violence – and 'that is the story of the 2024 election': analyst (msn.com)That is what is at stake in the macro sense in the next four years.  Political violence is not democracy: the rule of law is. Merrick Garland, attorney general on CBS 10/1/23: People can argue with each other as much as they want and as vociferously as they want. But the one thing they may not do is use violence and threats of violence to alter the outcome. An important aspect of this is the American people themselves. American people must protect each other. They must ensure that they treat each other with civility and kindness, listen to opposing views, argue as vociferously as they want, but refrain from violence and threats of violence. That's the only way this democracy will survive.Scott Pelley: Why do you feel so strongly about that?Merrick Garland: Well, I feel it for a number of reasons and a number of things that I've seen. But for my own family, who-- who-- fled religious persecution in Europe and some members who did not-- survive. When they got to the United States, United States protected them. It guaranteed-- that they could practice their religion, that they could vote, they could do all the things they thought a democracy would provide. That's the difference between this country and many other countries. And it's my responsibility, it's the Justice Department's responsibility to ensure that that difference continues, that we protect each other.Scott Pelley: Two of your ancestors were murdered in the Holocaust.Merrick Garland: Yes.Scott Pelley: Is that why you devoted yourself to the law?Merrick Garland: Yes. That's-- I would say that's why I devoted myself to the rule of law-- to public service-- to trying to ensure that the rule of law governs this country and continues to govern this country.  https://www.cbsnews.com/video/attorney-general-merrick-garland-60-minutes-video-2023-10-01/

The macro view of the long of it: November 2024 is not just a  battle between two old men over the next four years. It is whether democracy, as we have known it for 250 years, will continue.  It is choosing between visions of entire political parties or their factions up and down the ballot, giving the winner the backup needed to succeed.  Will we ever be a country,  and answer "yes" to the words of Rodney King: Can't we all just get along? Or will we be tied up in the madness of gridlock, inaction, incompetence, conflict, and even state-sanctioned violence, revenge,  and repression, leading to a one-man rule , an autocracy?   

The significance of Biden's Tempe speech:

The problem is there are plenty of pundits pointing out the choice between democracy and autocracy or a plethora of similar terms, but until Biden took off his kid gloves once again in Tempe, AZ, 9/28/23, that choice still needed defining and boosted. It appeared that the once disdained "political science" of a pro-democracy position for a Biden second term had gained traction in spite of its abstract concept in the midterms. It is not the first time Biden had addressed the theme. MUFTIC FORUM BLOG: Bravo. Biden brands MAGA Republicans, extremists, semi-fascists  (August 2022) Lately, he had said something similar to a smaller gathering. MUFTIC FORUM BLOG: Finally Biden takes off the kid gloves and attacks Trump as wanting to destroy democracy  

 Both of these messages got little coverage by the media, but they are becoming the overarching plank on Biden's platform and his case for re-electing him. Biden's speech, combined with Trump's inflammatory remarks on retiring Gen. Mark Milley, who" should have been shot",  should have been a media fire alarm and put in the context of how a dictator acts (treason per Trump is loyalty to dear leader, not to the constitution),\. Instead,  Biden's Tempe democracy remarks were covered as passing reference in the context of praise of John McCain and the opening of the McCain library. It took the next day for the coverage of his remarks about the danger of the MAGA movement to be reported as a stand-alone story. (I know: I could not find much coverage searching keywords like "democracy" or MAGA  from YouTube to Google later in the day of the Tempe speech.)  .  Slowly, in the few days following Tempe, the non-Trump devoted media realized the importance of Biden's attack on both Trump and MAGA in the context of their danger to democracy. The significance of that, for the first time, he called both of them out by name and did it with bullet point clarity. It was not just Trump that got tagged, it was the extreme core of his most loyal supporters and the dangerous movement they both represented.  Even then, I had to go to the White House site a day after the Tempe event to get the text and reproduce it on this blog. 

    In spite of media message coverage muddling, voters were getting the message that their democracy was indeed in danger, and polls showed it figured into the poor showing of the GOP in the 2022 midterms. Media may have thought the political science approach was boring and did not get them more listeners, readers, and users of social media, but they underestimated their audience's intelligence and ability to think critically. https://apnews.com/article/2022-midterm-elections-donald-trump-democracy-c3425635e40dd60c1ec7c1adba9fcc3a

  Biden represents a safe harbor, stability,  and the best chance for democracy's survival.  It was becoming an effective message strategy, more so than "what has Biden done for you...lately and effectively in spite of his age".  Until now, Biden's slogan seemed to be "competence vs chaos". However, the results of Biden's bi-partisan legislative successes and his competence were not felt yet by the voters. Fear of the chaos of a Trump second term was taking on greater urgency as the indictments and exposed evidence also gained greater public attention. Trump himself recently added his own fuel to his bonfire of democracy with very incendiary words, attacking the military for not being loyal to him himself, proposing to shut down media that did not praise him,  and turning the federal bureaucracy into a hand-picked force that carried out  Trump's desires instead of serving the public interest and the rule of law.  

Media can be partly excused for missing Biden's democracy vs autocracy messaging. Biden had low-keyed it himself.  In the few past times when Biden spoke about the danger to democracy, he skirted around naming those who he saw as the perpetrators. Maybe Biden was waiting to see if Trump would fend off his challengers because he wanted Trump to be his opponent due to the extreme and dangerous contrast he represented..  Biden himself needed to come out swinging and draw the contrast since the Trump madness seems to be gathering speed per alarming recent polls ( UPDATE) as he did 9/28/2023 in remarks in Tempe, AZ/    What the Tempe speech signals is that Biden sees Trump as the inevitable opponent in 2024. Biden did hedge his bet, but just in case Trump is not the party's candidate. The  MAGA movement is just as important a danger to democracy, with adherents waiting to step in. Biden can still run against Trump clones. He gave them brand names: MAGA extremists and MAGA Movement.  Furthermore, Biden also painted the entire GOP, not just the MAGAs, the extremists, as being complicit.  Their silence was deafening.   This is the kind of focus that has been lacking until now with so many terms applied to those who "do not believe in the Constitution", fascists, extremists, and right-wing extremists.  He needs to repeat, repeat, repeat the new theme.  Trump is a danger to democracy.  The MAGA movement is a danger to democracy.  From there,  explanatory points and examples can be put in context of whatever tweets, spoken words, and actions making the news that day demonstrate that danger.  

 The usual approach of those accused is to fire back that Biden is a danger to democracy because Trump is a victim of government persecution. Facts and judges' rulings don't count since they are all political. The MAGA movers try to distract with false equivalencies.  Everyone else is just as corrupt, too. Right? Wrong. The scorecard of indictments, court and jury rulings of liability, and impeachments of Trump vs everyone else is telling.  Trump will now be doing all he can to make himself look like a victim of Biden's weaponization of the deep state against him. It's all politics, right? Or for pete's sake. He would not have been in this fix if he had not been so flagrant in his unethical, fraudulent, and sometimes illegal methods to attain financial and political power.  It would be in his character that he plans to use media to make the point, it is all political, even appearing in person at criminal and civil trials, if not testifying in his own defense. Watch him run to the nearest microphone and camera after every damaging court proceeding. Does he really think those not in the Trump Movement forget increasing evidence that he was a flagrant cheat, amoral, a liar, a bully using the threat of fear and "retribution" (revenge against the disloyal to him), and a scofflaw in both his private and public lives? The chickens are coming home to roost now that he has lost the protection of prosecutorial rules and deference to a sitting president.  That is why it looks like he is being dumped on all at once and DQ'd as a candidate. Therefore,  his legal problems are all unfairly political.

  In Trump's own words, fear is real power. ( from  their book "Fear".Bob Woodward, Robert Costa July 1, 2020 ·  “'Real power is – I don’t even want to use the word – fear.'. Presidential candidate Donald J.Trump" Now those not in the MAGA movement, Democrats, Republicans, and independents, are beginning to fear the prospect of a Trump second term.  Biden is finding his voice as he goes on the attack by being specific, calling out names and examples, instead of being theoretical and leaving others to draw the connection.  Biden's speech in Tempe did provide a template of examples in a series of bullet points of how the MAGA movement and their leader, Trump, are both dangers to democracy' . 

And there is something dangerous happening in America now. There is an extremist movement that does not share the basic beliefs in our democracy: the MAGA Movement.

Not every Republican, not even a majority of Republicans, adhere to the MAGA extremist ideology. I know because I’ve been able to work with Republicans my whole career. But there is no question that today’s Republican Party is driven and intimidated by MAGA Republican extremists. Their extreme agenda, if carried out, would fundamentally alter the institutions of American democracy as we know it.

My friends, they’re not hiding their attacks. They’re openly promoting them — attacking the free press as the enemy of the people, attacking the rule of law as an impediment, fomenting voter suppression and election subversion.

Did you ever think we’d be having debates in the year — stage of your careers where banning books — banning books and burying history?

Extremists in Congress — more determined to shut down the government, to burn the place down than to let the people’s business be done.

Our U.S. military — and this is not hyperbole; I’ve said it for the last two years — is the strongest military in the history of the world. Not just the strongest in the world — in the history of the world. It’s the most diverse, the most powerful in the history of the world. And it’s being accused of being weak and “woke” by the opposition.

One guy in Alabama is holding up the promotion of every — hundreds of these officers.

Frankly, these extremists have no idea what the hell they’re talking about. (Laughter.) No, I’m serious.

They’re pushing a notion the defeated former President expressed when he was in office and believes applies only to him. And this is a dangerous notion: This president is above the law, with no limits on power.

Trump says the Constitution gave him, quote, “the right to do whatever he wants as President,” end of quote. I’ve never even heard a president say that in jest. Not guided by the Constitution or by common service and decency toward our fellow Americans but by vengeance and vindictiveness.

We see the headlines. Quote, “sweeping expansion of presidential power.” Their goal to, quote, “alter the balance of power by increasing the President’s authority over every part of the federal government,” end of quote.

What do they intend to do once they erode the constitutional order of checks and balances and separation of powers? Limit the independence of federal agencies and put them under the thumb of a president? Give the President the power to refuse to spend money that Congress has appropriated if he doesn’t like what it’s being spent for? Not veto — he doesn’t like what it’s being spent for — it’s there. Get rid of longstanding protections for civil servants?

Remember what he did as he was leaving office: He imposed a new thing, the Civil Service — but then he imposed a new pro- — schedule. “Schedule F,” it was called. These civil servants had to pledge loyalty to the President, not the Constitution. It did not require that they had any protections, and the President would be able to wholesale fire them if he wanted, because they had no so- — no — no Civil Service protection. One of the first things I got rid of when I became President.

Just consider these as actual quotes from MAGA — the MAGA movement. Quote, “I am your retribution.” “Slitting throats” of civil servants, replacing them with extreme political cronies. MAGA extremists proclaim support for law enforcement only to say, “We…” — quote, “We must destroy the FBI.”

It’s not one person. It’s the controlling element of the House Republican Party.

Whitewash attacks of January 6th by calling the spearing and stomping of police a leg- — quote, a “legitimate political discourse.”

Did you ever think you’d hear leaders of political parties in the United States of America speak like that? Seizing power, concentrating power, attempting to abuse power, purging and packing key institutions, spewing conspiracy theories, spreading lies for profit and power to divide America in every way, inciting violence against those who risk their lives to keep America safe, weaponizing against the very soul of who we are as Americans.

This MAGA threat is the threat to the brick and mortar of our democratic institutions. But it’s also a threat to the character of our nation and gives our — that gives our Constitution life, that binds us together as Americans in common cause.

None of this is surprising, though. They’ve tried to govern that way before. And thank God, they failed.

But they haven’t given up. Just look at recent days: their accusations against — of treason — treason against the major new net- — news network because they don’t like its coverage. I don’t know what the hell I’d say about Fox if that becomes the rule. (Laughter.)Do we still believe in the Constitution? Do we believe in the basic decency and respect? The whole country should honestly ask itself — and I mean this sincerely — what it wants and understand the threats to our democracy.................

I believe very strongly that the defining feature of our democracy is our Constitution.

I believe in the separation of powers and checks and balances, that debate and disagreement do not lead to disunion.

I believe in free and fair elections and the peaceful transfer of power.

                        I believe there is no place in America — none, none, none — for political violence. We                          have to denounce hate, not embolden it. "  (Source of  speech quotations: White House web site)

From an event honoring Gen. Mark Milley, Chairman  of the Joint Chiefs, on his retirement, who Trump had called a traitor who needed to be shot, came another clarification of American democracy. Milley had made it his guiding principle when dealing with Trump's attempt to use the active military to quash political protests against Trump.  In so doing, Milley inferred another tag to ID Trump: a wannabe dictator. “We are unique among the world’s militaries,” Milley said. “We don’t take an oath to a country, we don’t take an oath to a tribe, we don’t take an oath to a religion. We don’t take an oath to a king, or a queen, or a tyrant or a dictator.”

“And we don’t take an oath to a wannabe dictator,” he spat. “We take an oath to the Constitution and we take an oath to the idea that is America – and we’re willing to die to protect it.”   (source: CNN)

 Now for the micro, the issues that make up the macro. Getting into the weeds. A warning: the issues are not stand alone and a distraction from the core message that Trump and the MAGA Movement are a danger to democracy.   They need to be tied to the main message:  Never has democracy ever faced a threat from such a rogue president as Trump. His attempts to distort and ignore the results of an election and an overt attempt to overturn the election results to stay in power in his first term almost put us on a path to the destruction of democracy while replacing it with an autocracy.  Trump's announced plans for democracy in a second term include the increase of the power of an executive branch by every means possible, making federal employees and Department of Justice employees his appointees requiring loyalty to the president, their boss, and not to the Constitution or civil service credentials. Those seeking favors from the government will have to become bootlickers and financial contributors instead of being subject to the rule of laws they do not like. Whistleblowers would go the way of the dinosaurs.  

Trump's first term was a prologue, a predictor,  to a second term. Thanks to Trump's actions and policies, human and civil rights were rolled back for the first time since the post-Civil War years. His appointees to the Supreme Court took away half the country's women's healthcare choices and undermined voter rights and reforms to unfair political gerrymandering. His new effort to keep minorities from the polls (if you can't beat them, keep them from voting) is a war on any action, making it easy for presumed opposition to vote. Among those convenience methods are motor/voter registration, mail-in ballots, and accessible drop boxes, all used already in many states with no evidence of "fraud". The "stop the steal" BS has been debunked over and over again in court rulings and "forensic audits". His current thrust: Trump Instructs RNC to Replace Debates with Lawsuits Against Voter Registration - MeidasTouch Network If Trump had his way, the active military would be used to squash public protest gatherings and shoot protestors in their legs, and via his appointees to the military brass, no General Milley would stand in his way.Trump Wanted to Deploy 10,000 Active-Duty Troops to Quash Protests: Book (businessinsider.com)  Trump Told Officials to Shoot Protesters in the Leg, New Book Claims (businessinsider.com)  Trump, Paul Gosar suggest Gen. Mark Milley deserves death (cnbc.com)  .Trump says he would use that power to ban all media that does not praise him. Trump Vows to Ban All News Media That Doesn’t Praise Him (msn.com)  Bye, bye first amendment.  If the Consitution stands in his way, Trump has even proposed terminating, suspending it, or changing sections: Trump calls for 'end' of US Constitution in Truth Social post - YouTube

_________________________________________________________________________________

This next segment has also been reproduced in a separate posting/ MUFTIC FORUM BLOG: If democracy is on the ballot in 2024, are age and competence still issues  and moved to that posting.

Elephant in the room in 2024: https://www.denverpost.com/2023/10/03/colorado-abortion-pill-reversal-2024-ballot/?

How could the FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago and legal action be taken more seriously

How could the FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago and subsequent  AG Merrick Garland's  actions be taken more seriously than just more politics as usual?  Whatever the outcome, it will look like dirty politics and abuse of power to Trump supporters and it might never  be strong enough action for Trump's detractors that want to put an end to Trump's political ambitions or to put him in jail, or  to deter future presidents from doing the same. One constructive outcome will be to reaffirm the principle that no person, not even the president in or out of office, is above the law. The more important result of this drama could be to convince both sides of the political divide that abiding by the rules of classified document handling by even the commander-in-chief is vital to our national security and needs to be taken very seriously.  That possibility exists if enough convincing evidence is found that  ties Trump's irresponsible handling of the documents resulted in serious damage to the US spy network.  The  allegations are out there; so far there are only circumstantial suspicions.  Intelligence agencies fear that Trump has been leaking information on U.S. spies overseas (dailykos.com)

The problem  Attorney General Merrick Garland is facing is how any indictment or punishment can be viewed by skeptics and critics as more than a political gotcha and a technical violation of the laws. No matter what transpires from the more arm's length  special counsel's findings and recommendations, Garland will still have the make the ultimate judgment call. Whatever he does will be viewed as motivated by politics. Those who think Trump needs to be punished for setting an example to future presidents ignoring rules on handling classified documents and then obstructing the investigation will be angry if Garland does not prosecute Trump. Supporters of Trump will go ballistic, assigning political motivations to Garland. Whatever Garland does could make him seem the villain, not Trump, as the right wing media goes into overdrive..

If Trump's actions regarding the classified documents he took to Mar-a-Lago result in an indictment for breaking the rules of law and, most likely, obstruction of justice, and then found guilty at a trial that results in some sort of punishment, is serious on its own, but it may still appear to many that he was politically prosecuted on a technicality.  However, if his irresponsible actions and playing loose with classified national security documents resulted in real harm to national security, that may make his actions look truly dangerous. 

 The more serious revelation could be to tie Trump to outing our spies abroad, resulting in their death or recall. The news story that this prosecution is just politics or involves a minor technical detail that deserves a slap on the hand  will take a turn as anti-Trumpers can make a stronger case that Trump cannot be trusted to be a president again because what he did was a danger to national security, whatever his motivation. The purpose of responsible by-the-book treatment of classified documents will be vindicated in the minds of more current and future voters. They are absolutely necessary to protect national security interests. 

For more, go tohttps://mufticforumblog.blogspot.com/2022/08/ticked-deep-state-is-out-to-get-trump.html

 

 

Will and can the DOJ prosecute Donald Trump for crimes? Maybe

(Formerly embedded in the July 21 posting and moved to this separate post, revised and updated. )

The most immediate question is if Trump and his allies are criminally prosecuted for what they did to overturn the results of the 2020 election and to give Trump a second term.  Maybe. There are some challenges.  It is not cut and dried. The purpose such criminal prosecution serves is not only to punish but to prevent Trump and others from trying it again.  It also will serve as educating voters about how close they came to losing democracy and also to be on alert it could still happen.

As the January 6 committee rested its case at least until fall, the spotlight is now on the Department of Justice led by  Attorney General Merrick Garland to decide whether to charge Trump with a crime via a grand jury. Not every shady practice is a crime on the books.  Dereliction of duty, the accusatory phrase used most in the January 6 hearings, is viewed as a crime in the military, but not in federal laws.   For any criminal charge, prosecutors must prove beyond a reasonable doubt the intent to commit a crime or directly commit ta chargeable crime on the books beyond a reasonable doubt.  That Garland does not exempt a former president from prosecution was confirmed recently in remarks he made.  No person, including Trump,  is above the law. https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/ag-garland-reiterates-person-trump-law-jan/story?id=87140695   The reasons put forth by some not to prosecute Trump is the fear that this sets a dangerous precedence that would impact future administrations. However, Trump's case was unique in our history. No president had ever attempted a coup to overturn an election. That is a specific case with specific facts and charges that threatened the very foundation of the rule of law and American democracy.   To let Trump off the hook would set even more dangerous precedence, giving green lights to him and other wannabes for attempting the same in the future, free of painful repercussions.

The Justice Department has a challenge in proving beyond a reasonable doubt Trump intentionally committed a crime.    Intent and a heavy burden of proof are elements needed to charge and convict anyone of a crime that is on the statute books.   Trump has a  long history of thumbing his nose at rules and laws. For him, the rule of law and abiding by laws are barriers to be ignored or gotten around. In his business life before becoming president, penalties, restitution, and lawyer fees were just the cost of doing business and they never deterred him from doing a similar dirty deed again.  Two impeachments didn't stop him nor did the Stormy daniels saga or the findings of civil fraud in the Trump University scheme.  None of this was a secret and sometimes his legal escapades made the headlines. . Declaring numerous bankruptcies was a  business strategy to avoid paying obligations.  Bullying and threats were his weapons.    To avoid loss in civil suits and possible criminal charges,  he learned to leave no fingerprints or evidence of potential culpability, shred documents that would be paper trails of shady practices, and forbad tape recordings like the one that ended Nixon's presidency and did not use email. Using lies to make his point was a good strategy, not a moral wrong.  The most current example, after being told by his family, his attorney general, and rulings by 60 judges, that the election was not stolen, he continued the big lie to fuel the events of January 6.

Trump couched his threats in parsed conversations. Direct evidence that Trump gave the orders for others to commit a crime would give the DOJ's case wings, but the next best can be testimony by witnesses that he intended to do so, his state of mind. and the circumstances around the event. The witness testimony under oath revealed by the January 6 committee was a very significant contribution to the evidence of Trump's state of mind.  His method of avoiding accountability for his actions was honed over the years. First came his ask and then hinting at a threat came somewhere else in the paragraph. Sometimes he just appealed for the loyalty to him he demanded. in return for continued support.  Classic examples were "find me those missing votes ", "get me more dirt on Hunter Biden", and "simply declare the electoral college votes a fraud, I'll take care of the rest". The following threat phrases were not spoken but implied: "I'll primary you", "ruin your political future", "not give you your anti-tank missiles " and  "do it even if you have to break the law or announce a faux investigation. "  That was the message his targets heard; they got it.  As his fixer/personal attorney  Michael Cohen who was jailed for hiding Trump'sexpenses in silencing Stormy Daniels, often related,  Trump gave no direct orders to his fixers and allies and lieutenants, but hinted at his wishes, expected them to do the dirty work,  and take the fall in silence if they got caught.    Direct evidence that Trump actually gave the orders for others to commit a crime would give the DOJ's case wings, but the next best evidence can be testimony by witnesses that he intended to do so, his state of mind. The witness testimony under oath revealed by the January 6 committee was likely the most significant contribution to the evidence of Trump's state of mind.

  Listening to the attorneys and legal experts commenting on TV over the past weeks and post-July 21 hearing, there are at least some possible charges. The next challenge is for the DOJ to present the evidence and case to a grand jury.to indict or charge Trump with probably causing a criminal act. The next DOJ decision is whether to go to trial by jury. Merrick Garland has recently indicated that no person, even the president, is above the law, so the indication is that he could charge the president if he so chose.  Most prosecutors usually proceed to a jury trial only if they believe they have a probable conviction, making them more cautious to act than the public would expect.

 1, The clearest thought on an appropriate charge so far I heard was presented by William Cohen this past week.on cable TV.  Cohen is a  Republican who served as both a member of the United States House of Representatives and Senate and as Secretary of Defense under Democratic President Bill Clinton.   He suggested the charge of an accessory to and after the commission of a crime.  Even if Trump did not directly execute the crime himself it is a crime to be an accessory, aiding, and abetting the execution of a crime. 

2. Conspiracy to commit sedition, is a charge already levied on the Proud Boys and Oath keepers. Treason itself cannot be charged unless we are at war. Seditious conspiracy is the peacetime version.  Overturning an election that is part of a  legitimate democratic process is likely a seditious act.  This is a very heavy lift to accuse a past president of something like treason. particularly undermined as a deterrent if no penalties result such as jail time.

3. To interfere with an official government function, is a crime.  The certification of the electoral count is an official government (and Constitutional) function.  This is an obvious one, but the consequences are not very severe.

4. Indict him as a co-conspirator, either unnamed or named. . Trump was the unnamed person number 1 in the Stormy Daniels, Michael Cohen escapade.  Unnamed would be a slap with a wet noodle leaving the question of personal accountability charge as applied to him debated forever.. Its value would mostly be to educate the public about how unfit he was and is to be a president and to influence public opinion about him.  The only penalty levied would be making it more likely Trump will lose an attempt at a second term.

There are other charges out there, but these are the ones I heard most frequently.

Even then, how many of these charges are voters willing to tolerate or believe in his guilt in numbers enough to stop him at the ballot box even if he wins or is found guilty at trial. That is the ultimate question.

ed)

: Can and will Trump be charged with a crime by the DOJ? The future of democracy might depend on the answer

Revised and updated: July 24, 2022

The ball is now in the Department of Justice's court: Can and will Trump be charged with a crime? Merrick Garland should. The future of democracy could hang on it or might not, depending if the impact on the public mood and voters' reactions could spoil  Trump's attempt to win a second term in 2024.  We may get a sense of this in the November 2022 midterms if Trumpists win or lose their races in counties, states, and Congress. According to Axios reporting, secret plans were being developed and had begun to be implemented by Trump and his allies to consolidate control of the entire federal bureaucracy, sabotage democracy as we have known it for 250 years, and keep him or those like him in office for years to come.  His choices already dominate the Supreme Court as the list of decisions on public policy this year demonstrates, from ending Roe v Wade to knee-capping the EPA's ability to fight climate change. The rest of the federal bench is still showing a firm streak of independence throwing out over sixty court cases for lack of evidence the 2020 election was stolen.  Further execution of it these plans will now depend upon his saving a second term. Trump devised the scheme in 2020 known as "Schedule F" and began to implement it by executive order, but Biden ended it.   That scheme would have Trump end federal civil servants' protection from political pressure in such vital agencies as the Justice Department, the military, and the IRS among agencies, and replace  50,000  holding key policy related positionswith those loyal to Trump himself rather than to the Constitution. and the rules of law.  In practical terms, what Schedule F would mean for citizens who were not pledged to Trump and  Trumpism is that they need not apply to a federal agency to fix a problem or change policies. In time, whether citizens like Trump or not, they need to demonstrate their loyalty, not to abide by the rules and laws, but to Trump, Trumpism, and Trummpists who interpret and enforce the rules.   

It is such a  power grab that becomes self-perpetuating. To have a voice, and get business done, you have to jump on their train. That is how dictatorships begin to consolidate power and remain in control, subverting and destroying the more impartial rule of law until the next revolution, violent or velvet, unseats them because it would take that to get regime change. as the election process is controlled by the dear leader, as well.  It is far better to nip this anti-democratic movement of Trumpism in the bud now by using the ballot box while you can than to unseat an entrenched autocrat later. Don't think the MAGA mouthpieces and cheerleaders do not have that in mind. Steve Bannon, just convicted of contempt of Congress, ranted that if MAFA succeeds now it will be in power for a hundred years. Bannon says MAGA will govern for 100 years That is what is at stake and why it is important that Trump and their followers feel enough pain and repercussions to send the message to wannabe Trumpists that the price is too high to pay for such a power grab.  That is why both the January 6 Committee's actions to shine a light on Trump and his failed coup are so important.  It is also why the Department of Justice's actions to get accountability through criminal prosecution become so important.  However, if it is not translated into votes on November 22 and November 24, democracy will not survive another four years of Trumpism. As even a powerful conservative judge noted in his ruling, Trump is a "clear and present danger" to democracy. Conservative judge: Trump is a clear and present danger to democracy  

 The problem those of us who care about the fairness of governance that the Constitution provides is faced with a sizeable group of voters, still, about 30 to 40% of the electorate, do not give a whit,.  It is my theory that one of the reasons for this is that they are ignorant of history and how much similar public sentiment gave rise to the fascist and communist dictators of the last century. It did not end well. It resulted in their demise in losing world wars and cold wars.  It also brought unanticipated suffering to their own citizens who had swallowed propaganda. and oratory by demagogic leaders using modern media. Another powerful force driving Trumposm is empowering their brand of politics to gain more power to enhance their own personal ambitions and economic self-interests. What counts in the day-to-day lives of most of those supporting Trumpism with no political ambitions they say are inflation and crime..  More important drivers, I believe, are the cultural issues of white Christian nationalism. fueled by fear their beliefs are under attack by modern and liberal social values and by rising black and brown demographics.  That gas prices are decreasing and Biden is increasing funding for police, and with Trumpists proposing nothing to solve those problems,  those issues may not be the same hot topics in 2024,  Nonetheless,  cultural wars will persist. 

 https://www.axios.com/2022/07/22/trump-2025-radical-plan-second-termhttps://www.axios.com/2022/07/22/trump-presidency-schedule-f-federal-employees

__________________________________________________________________________________

This following segment has been moved to a separate, stand-alone posting, revised and updated dated  July 25 

The most immediate question is if Trump and his allies are criminally prosecuted for what they did to overturn the results of the 2020 election and to give Trump a second term.  The purpose such prosecution serves is not only to punish but to prevent Trump and others from trying it again.  It also will serve as educating voters about how close they came to losing democracy, but also to be on alert it could still happen.

As the January 6 committee rested its case, at least until fall, the spotlight is now on the Department of Justice led by  Attorney General Merrick Garland to decide whether to charge Trump with a crime via a grand jury. Not every shady practice is a crime on the books.  Dereliction of duty, the accusatory phrase used most in the January 6 hearings, is viewed as a crime in the military, but not in federal laws.   For any criminal charge, prosecutors must prove beyond a reasonable doubt the intent to commit a crime or directly commit ta chargeable crime on the books beyond a reasonable doubt.  That Garland does not exempt a former president from prosecution was confirmed recently in remarks he made.  No person, including Trump,  is above the law. https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/ag-garland-reiterates-person-trump-law-jan/story?id=87140695   The reasons put forth by some not to prosecute Trump is the fear that this sets a dangerous precedence that would impact future administrations. However, Trump's case was unique in our history. No one had ever attempted a coup and to overturn an election. specific That is  a specific case that threatened the very foundation of the riule of law and American democracy. to that kind of behavior .   To let Trump off the hook would set an even more dangerous precedencece, giving green lights to him and other wannabes for attemmpting the same in the future, free of painful repercussions.

The Justice Department has a challenge in proving beyond a reasonable doubt Trump intentionally committed a crime.    Intent and a heavy burden of proof are elements needed to charge and convict anyone of a crime that is on the statute books.   Trump has a  long history of thumbing his nose at rules and laws. For him, the rule of law and abiding by laws are barriers to be ignored, and gotten around. In his business life before becoming president, penalties, restitution, and lawyer fees were just the cost of doing business and they never deterred him from doing a similar dirty deed again.  Two impeachments didn't stop him nor did the Stormy daniels saga or the findings of civil fraud in the Trump University scheme.  None of this was a secret and sometimes his legal escapades made the headlines. . Declaring numerous bankruptcies was a  business strategy to avoid paying obligations.  Bullying and threats were his weapons.    To avoid loss in civil suits and possible criminal charges,  he learned to leave no fingerprints or evidence of potential culpability, shred documents that would be paper trails of shady practices, and forbad tape recordings like the one that ended Nixon's presidency and did not use email. Using lies to make his point was a good strategy, not a moral wrong.  The most current example, after being told by his family, his attorney general, and rulings by 60 judges, that the election was not stolen, he continued the big lie to fuel the events of January 6.

Trump couched his threats in parsed conversations. Direct evidence that Trump gave the orders for others to commit a crime would give the DOJ's case wings, but the next best can be testimony by witnesses that he intended to do so, his state of mind. and the circumstances around the event. The witness testimony under oath revealed by the January 6 committee was a very significant contribution to the evidence of Trump's state of mind.  His method of avoiding accountability for his actions was honed over the years. First came his ask and then hinting at a threat came somewhere else in the paragraph. Sometimes he just appealed for the loyalty to him he demanded. in return for continued support.  Classic examples were "find me those missing votes ", "get me more dirt on Hunter Biden", and "simply declare the electoral college votes a fraud, I'll take care of the rest". The following threat phrases were not spoken but implied: "I'll primary you", "ruin your political future", "not give you your anti-tank missiles " and  "do it even if you have to break a law or announce a faux investigation. "  That was the message his targets heard; they got it.  As his fixer/personal attorney  Michael Cohen who was jailed for hiding Trump'sexpenses in silencing Stormy Daniels, often related,  Trump gave no direct orders to his fixers and allies and lieutenants, but hinted at his wishes, expected them to do the dirty work,  and take the fall in silence if they got caught.    Direct evidence that Trump actually gave the orders for others to commit a crime would give the DOJ's case wings, but the next best evidence can be testimony by witnesses that he intended to do so, his state of mind. The witness testimony under oath revealed by the January 6 committee was likely the most significant contribution to the evidence of Trump's state of mind.

  Listening to the attorneys and legal experts commenting on TV over the past weeks and post-July 21 hearing, there are at least some possible charges. The next challenge is for the DOJ to present the evidence and case to a grand jury.to indict or charge Trump with probably causing a criminal act. The next DOJ decision is whether to go to trial by jury. Merrick Garland has recently indicated that no person, even the president, is above the law, so the indication is that he could charge the president if he so chose.  Most prosecutors usually proceed to a jury trial only if they believe they have a probable conviction, making them more cautious to act than the public would expect.

 1, The clearest thought on an appropriate charge so far I heard was presented by William Cohen this past week.on cable TV.  Cohen is a  Republican who served as both a member of the United States House of Representatives and Senate and as Secretary of Defense under Democratic President Bill Clinton.   He suggested the charge of an accessory to and after the commission of a crime.  Even if Trump did not directly execute the crime himself it is a crime to be an accessory, aiding, and abetting the execution of a crime. 

2. Conspiracy to commit sedition, is a charge already levied on the Proud Boys and Oath keepers. Treason itself cannot be charged unless we are at war. Seditious conspiracy is the peacetime version.  Overturning an election that is part of a  legitimate democratic process is likely a seditious act.

3. To interfere with an official government function, is a crime.  The certification of the electoral count is an official government (and Constitutional) function.

4. Indict him as a co-conspirator, either unnamed or named. . Trump was the unnamed person number 1 in the Stormy Daniels, Michael Cohen escapade.  Unnamed would be a slap with a wet noodle leaving the question of personal accountability charge as applied to him debated forever.

There are other charges out there, but these are the ones I heard most frequently.

Even then, how many of these charges are voters willing to tolerate or believe in his guilt in numbers enough to stop him at the ballot box even if he wins or is found guilty at trial. That is the ultimate question.