1. Best judge, best trial schedule, best venue, most consequential charges: DC
2. Best defendant list, mug shots: Georgia
3. Most straightforward guilt, worst judge, worst venue: Florida
4. If all else fails: New York
5. Honorable mention for courage, determination and victory: E. Jean Carroll
I'm not really following this stuff particularly closely. The son of a bitch is guilty as hell, so the underlying facts are almost entirely old news. It's all about process now, and I maintain a basic awareness of stuff like trial dates.
I was paying close attention for a few days after the Georgia indictment but there are so many cases, so many crimes, and so many indictments, it's hard to keep up.
I'm sentimentally attached to the NY prosecution both out of localism and because I used to work for Bragg when he was in the AG's office, but it's the weakest. First filed, though!
I like the "which is your favourite" approach because I am secretly hoping for some really obscure hipster indictment to be mentioned that no one else knows about.
teofilo pops up to say that he's really only interested in the prosecution in Anaktuvuk Pass District for Trump's infringement of an obscure clause of the Treaty of Trianon or something.
It's interesting how the conventional wisdom has changed regarding timetable. It really is conceivable that Trump will be convicted prior to the election -- but that was viewed as near-impossible a few months ago. And a year or so ago, I think there was well-informed pessimism about whether he would even be charged.
I have an obvious question that no news source seems to want to answer: What happens to Trump after the election if he wins and is sentenced to prison in Georgia?
I'm having an amorphous thought contrasting the downfall I yearned for during his administration with the realistic cobbling together of all these slow-moving gears and the culminating effect on the narrative.
In other words, one of Trump's greatest strengths was the sheer quantity of lies and much strength a lie gathers as it's repeated over and over again (by everyone, in any form). I kept wanting any one single incident to be his unraveling, but it couldn't have been.
Now there is finally a gathering of a sheer quantity of storytelling and wrong-doing to keep the headlines churning out and it gathers that same sort of strength. So it seems kind of fitting that this tortoise-like-wheels-of-justice will clinch the narrative about who he is.
Everybody already knows who he is. Everyone already knows how they'd vote if he's on the ballot. The three paragraphs above are all garbage.
What happens to Trump after the election if he wins and is sentenced to prison in Georgia?
I'm not a lawyer, but I'm pretty sure the U.S. Supreme Court would get involved. Thomas, Alito, Kavanaugh, and Barrett would vote in Trump's favor, and I think it's not too crazy to hope that Roberts would be a lower-c conservative on this particular issue and therefore vote against him, so I guess that makes Kavanaugh the swing justice?
Thinking about it a bit more, though, I don't think it matters. If Trump gets elected even after getting convicted and the SC rules against him, or if he gets elected without an actual conviction in any of the current cases, American democracy is fucked regardless and the details don't matter too much. I can imagine lots of hopeful scenarios but none of them for democracy here in the event of him becoming president again.
I'm pretty confident that any sentence gets stayed pending appeal/cert, so he's not in jail on election day, and probably not inauguration day.
If affirmed, his sentence gets modified or suspended in a way that allows him to be president. "The design of the Constitution" probably precludes state imprisonment. (I'm forgetting the name of the catch-all, bullshit phrase they use for this shit.)
Cyrus, what about Gorsuch?
My favorite is DC -- not my hometown, but DDC is a place I'll always have a soft spot for.
What happens to Trump after the election if he wins and is sentenced to prison in Georgia?
His security detail gets the cell next door and the commissary has to carry his hair products.
I am interested to read today that the conventional wisdom seems to be that a March 4 trial start in DC is actually a likely outcome -- that the opportunities to delay it are sparse. (Here is Slate and here is TPM.
5: I think the belief that the prosecutions weren't going to go forward in a timely way was maybe based on overstated cynicism about "the system" being rigged in Trump's favor. I was noticing this with people talking about the NY prosecution -- there was a hiccup where a couple of prosecutors who'd been on the case before Bragg took over quit because they were unhappy with how he was managing it. And people seemed really ready to interpret that as a conspiracy to let Trump off the hook, which didn't make a lot of sense to me.
It's not a good idea to trust the system blindly, but I think people like us sometimes shift too far in the other direction.
The Slate piece linked by pf is right that the defense in DDC has a shit-ton of work to do in a fairly short time. I suppose they'll get started on it, but you can bet that they are sitting around trying to think of an order they can maneuver the judge into making that they'll be able to get a stay pending cert from the USSC (after the DC Circuit swiftly affirms). Something existential, and not laughable. The client is of no help whatsoever in formulating this strategy.
Does anyone think the schedule is actually so tight (considering the discovery volume) as to verge on being unfair?
I lean to not, mostly because he can afford to hire any number of people for discovery scutwork.
I too lean towards not, because (a) it's taken 2 and a half years to get this far, and (b) fuck Trump.
the U.S. Supreme Court would get involved. Thomas, Alito, Kavanaugh, and Barrett would vote in Trump's favor
I keep thinking of Trump yanking Gorsuch around during the swearing-in handshake. I hope Gorsuch has nothing more he could want from Trump and holds a grudge.
I think Gorsuch, Thomas, and Alito are the ones who watch too much Fox News and will do basically whatever the conservative media wants them to do. If it's not a big conservative hobby-horse than Gorsuch is less crazy than the other two. Conversely Coney-Barrett has insane viewpoints, but can think for herself. Kavanaugh is a bad person personally, but legally is basically a McConnell-style normie Republican.
Obviously it depends on what exactly comes before them. The NY case is on shaky legal ground and could well see a large majority on Trump's side, but the other ones not knowing anything my expectation would be 7-2 or 6-3 depending on how stupid Gorsuch is feeling. Coney Barrett, like most highly educated evangelicals, probably hates Trump because he's a dumb slut. And Kavanaugh and Roberts want normie Republicans being the nominee.
15-17: I used to have procedural liberal tendencies, but I think we all recognize that Cyrus gets it right in 16(b). I mean, yeah, sure, it's an interesting academic question whether Trump is getting a fair shake on the discovery issue. But I will go so far as to say that I hope Chutkan in DC treats him as unfairly as the law allows. After all, it's a distinct possibility that Cannon in Florida plans to do the same -- in the other direction.
Francis Suarez dropped out of the race, so we have to see how this shakes up the Republican field.
13 is extremely correct. The faux-wise cynical stance was always at least a little dumb (as LB notes, it included thinking that people/places who hate Trump as much as you do wouldn't seriously try to convict him), but the frustrating thing is that, per usual, people whose framework has been pretty decisively damaged by the passage of events won't ever acknowledge or adjust their POV because of it. Nor will others be less likely to parrot their latest predictions.
1 is an excellent starting point, btw.
After all, it's a distinct possibility that Cannon in Florida plans to do the same -- in the other direction.
Not to get all 11th dimensional, but, given the timeline, I wonder if Cannon will end up exceeding our expectations. Not because she isn't the worst sort of hack, but because, by the time her trial is properly under way*, he might literally have already been convicted elsewhere, conceivably twice. Given how bad the facts are in her case, there might be a certain rational calculus that leads to her put her thumb only lightly on the scales.
By contrast, if this were the only live case, I would expect her to do almost literally everything possible to derail the prosecution. But vindication in one of two federal trials and 2 of 5 trials overall doesn't really do him any good, and it might do her some lasting harm (if the cheating were flagrant enough).
*if I'm recalling the calendar graphic I saw correctly
13/22: I remember the reason being articulated for the difficulty of concluding quickly was that there would be a lot of pretrial motions, some routine, some novel, whose time needed couldn't be fully accounted for, especially in how unprecedentedly far they might be appealed up the ladder and how long the higher courts might take to decide on them. Now, I do see that Judge Chutkan has given a full trial schedule that gives some time for pretrial motions. And the trial date itself is unappealable. But can it fully account for disposition of motions?
The Michigan Secretary of State is apparently actively looking at the Section 3 qualification issue, as well as NH's.
25 She can decide motions quickly, and the DC Circuit can as well. Whoever appeals from its rulings can try to stay the case -- what I was alluding to above was the possibility that the SC would do so if the appeal is non-frivolous and the issue case-dispositive. So Trump's team has to decide what they think that is going to be, and do what they can to develop the factual basis for it.
From what I have followed of the Cannon case (some of it from emptywheel (not a lawyer but someone who does get into the detail) it appears that any thumb she is putting on the scale has been light so far, and possibly explained in part by inexperience. She has apparently been slow and generally solicitous of Woodward (lawyer with potential conflicts). The whole thing with unsealing and demanding explanation of the DC Grand Jury seemed a bit odd--the most damning interpretation is that she did it the Monday after Trusty had been on conservative media over the weeekend blasting the fact of the ongoing Washington grand jury.
it appears that any thumb she is putting on the scale has been light so far
Plausible, but has she made any particularly important decisions so far?
as well as NH's.
Elite NH Republicans would love nothing more than to get him off the ballot, although going so far as to admit that Trump lead an insurrection might be too big a pill to swallow. Unless there is a conviction before the NH primaries, its likely he'll be on the ballot.
Although my money says that he's going to flee the country before any of this.
I seem to recall that one time he had Kushner set up a compound in Brazil just in case it was ever needed, but with Bolsonaro not in charge down there anymore, he may have to go back to plan A, Russia.
I still think Baku or Dubai is where he'd go.
I cannot believe he'll flee the country. Partially because his ideology (that his thoughts shape reality) won't allow him to consider any negative outcome and partially because his identity is so strongly New York/Florida. Where could he go that he could set himself up as king? He can't tolerate being at some other ruler's sufferance.
I was going to say I thought enough of his wealth was tied up in assets he might not do well out of the country, but I googled and considered opinion is he now has over $400m in cash and liquid assets, more than he ever did before or as president. I don't know how hard it would be to make liquid in some haven if he fled.
33 Y'all may remember my proposed solution from during the Trump admin: Denmark gives up Greenland, all the inhabited areas (and some surrounding country) to Canada, the remainder to Donald Fairhair, with Ivanka the Wise designated as his successor. He could sell titles of nobility to raise funds to construct hotels and casinos, people who accept them would eligibility to serve in office in the US. US gives the Virgin Islands back to Denmark.
To sweeten this, maybe Melania Trump could be given Canadian citizenship.
"I seem to recall that one time he had Kushner set up a compound in Brazil just in case it was ever needed"
I needed a mission. And for my sins they gave me one. Brought it up to me like room service.
Captain "WEAK WILLARD" is NOT AN ASSASSIN! He is an ERRAND BOY sent by GROCERY CLERKS like CROOKED JOE BIDEN to "COLLECT a BILL"!!
Maybe he could be tricked into going to Saint Helena?
Has anyone posted this?
Even among self-declared Rs, Trump's numbers crash in the event that he's convicted, enough to double the margin from 2020.
Maybe he'll bow out for the good of the party.
I'm going to believe really hard that I'm lving in the Brightening Timeline, where Trump 1. Is not convicted before the primaries, resulting in 2. All other Rs renewing their oaths of obeisance, but 3. Is convicted before the general, resulting in 4. D lanslides in 2024 and 2028 (which Trump contests from prison).
As one of the people who thought Trump was going to get away with it. I am really hoping I get to eat my words, but I'm not even going to put salt on them until he's in prison waiting for the results of his appeal.
Since we're talking about the Supreme Court probably taking up his appeal maybe I should point out that everybody on the Supreme Court who's thinking of voting against him has to consider the possibility he might get to five votes anyway.
The nice thing about Trump is that he's been so completely shitty to people who have helped him that I don't think any judge is going to think "I'll protect myself by siding with Trump."
I think the only way he gets away with it is he wins in 2024. Which is what I worry about.
Did I ask this before? Because poor memory is a symptom of Bradycardia.
"I don't think any judge is going to think "I'll protect myself by siding with Trump"
On the other hand, if you're the judge that sentences Trump to prison, his supporters will try to murder you.
32: Dubai maybe, because monarchs think they're God's gift to God. Baku, though, is fighting a nasty little war in Nagorno-Karabakh. They're working on a second Armenian genocide and the last thing they need is for Uncle Sam to pay full attention to their country. Especially because it's been a while since we've thrown a crappy one up against a wall just to remind everyone that we can do that without even breaking a sweat.
Maybe he could be tricked into going to Saint Helena?
St Helena is quite nice, I believe. Could I interest you in Inexpressible Island?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inexpressible_Island
Because poor memory is a symptom of bradycardia.
Abnormally low blood pressure leading to a partially deflated heart is known as Bradycardia.
The US can't pollute Antarctica. There's a treaty.
45: Hopefully Cannon is seeing this firsthand in how he handles her case, as with witness Yuscil Taveras who was obviously being suborned into perjury by the Trump PAC lawyer:
Chief Judge Boasberg made available independent counsel (the First Assistant to the Federal Public Defender's office for the District of Columbia) to provide advice to Trump Employee 4 regarding potential conflicts. On July 5, 2023, Trump Employee 4 informed Chief Judge Boasberg that he no longer wished to be represented by Mr. Woodward and that, going forward, he wished to be represented by the First Assistant Federal Defender. Immediately after receiving new counsel, Trump Employee 4 retracted his prior false testimony and provided information that implicated Nauta, de Oliveira, and Trump in efforts to delete security camera footage..."
This is a pretty good gloss on the DDC proceedings this week: https://statuskuo.substack.com/p/all-rise-for-judge-tanya-chutkan
The bit about Judge Chutkan calling the judge in NY is unexpected but welcome.
Why can't you suborn someone to do something nice?
Unless there is a conviction before the NH primaries, its likely he'll be on the ballot.
Probably the way to thread this needle would be to declare in advance of the DC trial that anyone convicted of charges associated with Jan 6 is ineligible. Hell, there's hundreds of already convicted people, declare all of them ineligible to stand for federal offices.
Point being to get the ball rolling in advance, and not (technically) exclusive to one person. I mean, we know that plenty of Jan 6 people have held offices, it wouldn't be remotely unlikely for some of them to run for Congress.
43 is both best case and actually reasonably likely.
It occurs to me that, if MI really did keep him off the ballot, that wouldn't deter him in the least, yet it would make him winning a near-impossibility.
Wow, how had I never heard of 52? I was sure you'd just made a typo for the much more well-known Inaccessible Island.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inaccessible_Island
I wonder if GA would also make a move to keep him off the ballot. The Republicans in office there seem to be genuinely pissed about Trump trying to get them to commit crimes.
Suborn has had its unseemly meaning going back to French and it looks like Latin, but I wonder what the original formulation was. Lat. orno mean to dress or to equip (vt). So like, slip someone some money under their toga?
OED glosses the Latin as "to supply, equip, to dress up (with a costume or disguise), to put on an appearance of, to prepare, instruct (for a secret or underhand purpose)".
For nice things it would be superorning.
60: I actually saw a play set on Inexpressible Island. I gave it a glowing review (it was my only venture into West End theatre criticism). The day after my review appeared, the play closed.
59: I dunno, MI is likely to go blue anyway. Trump can win without it if he takes PA and GA.
Subawning. Because it's normally done under cover.