https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-66162668

<quote>

Donald Trump has asked for his trial on charges of illegally stashing classified documents to be postponed until after the 2024 election.

</quote>

Makes sense. Trump knows support will be diminished if he is found guilty of the most serious crimes an American can commit.

I presume he knows, like everyone else, that he will be found guilty because the evidence is so compelling, and he even self-incriminated himself, knows this is his one shot to get a second term.

The question now is; should America set judicial process aside just to allow Loser Trump that second term ?

On Tue, 11 Jul 2023 13:11:55 +0100, The Happy Hippy wrote:

> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-66162668
>
> <quote>
>
> Donald Trump has asked for his trial on charges of illegally stashing
> classified documents to be postponed until after the 2024 election.
>
> </quote>
>
> Makes sense. Trump knows support will be diminished if he is found
> guilty of the most serious crimes an American can commit.
>
> I presume he knows, like everyone else, that he will be found guilty
> because the evidence is so compelling, and he even self-incriminated
> himself, knows this is his one shot to get a second term.
>
> The question now is; should America set judicial process aside just to
> allow Loser Trump that second term ?

If they prosecute Trump for this it's only fair that Clinton's insecure
server and phones under the hammer get re-visited. I don't see how it's
different really - except who is being pursued and why.

At the time I wasn't for Hillary being prosecuted for that and I'm not for
Trump being prosecuted for the documents - although keeping them was
pretty dumb. There was no treachery invovled in either case (that I know
of). I don't think either serve the public good and only served to damage
America. If there isn't a mutually-assured destruction thing about using
the law against political opponents and it proves to be effective it's not
going to be long before they're wheeling out the guillotine. Look at the
list of charges against Trump - they really don't want him getting out of
that hole.

It will piss off the public pretty badly too... some of them anyway.

On Wed, 12 Jul 2023 08:10:27 GMT
TWP <ngspammersad@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 11 Jul 2023 13:11:55 +0100, The Happy Hippy wrote:
>
> > https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-66162668
> >
> > <quote>
> >
> > Donald Trump has asked for his trial on charges of illegally
> > stashing classified documents to be postponed until after the 2024
> > election.
> >
> > </quote>
> >
> > Makes sense. Trump knows support will be diminished if he is found
> > guilty of the most serious crimes an American can commit.
> >
> > I presume he knows, like everyone else, that he will be found guilty
> > because the evidence is so compelling, and he even self-incriminated
> > himself, knows this is his one shot to get a second term.
> >
> > The question now is; should America set judicial process aside just
> > to allow Loser Trump that second term ?
>
>
> If they prosecute Trump for this it's only fair that Clinton's
> insecure server and phones under the hammer get re-visited. I don't
> see how it's different really - except who is being pursued and why.
>
> At the time I wasn't for Hillary being prosecuted for that and I'm
> not for Trump being prosecuted for the documents - although keeping
> them was pretty dumb. There was no treachery invovled in either case
> (that I know of). I don't think either serve the public good and
> only served to damage America. If there isn't a mutually-assured
> destruction thing about using the law against political opponents and
> it proves to be effective it's not going to be long before they're
> wheeling out the guillotine. Look at the list of charges against
> Trump - they really don't want him getting out of that hole.
>
> It will piss off the public pretty badly too... some of them anyway.

But it's nonsense to pretend the Trump case is a witch hunt, is only being pursued because he's a political opponent.

Trump has demonstrably broken the law, and a big one, in a big way.

To try and pretend there's equivalence between Hillary and Trump is ridiculous.

You would be better off arguing there's equivalence in Biden and Pence both having been found to have top secret documents in their possession.

But the difference there is neither knew they had them, admitted they did, cooperated fully in ensuring those were surrendered. Trump lied about having his, did all he could to prevent them being returned and deliberately frustrated investigations and hid the documents he shouldn't have had.

If Trump had put his hands-up, admitted "my bad", he'd have got a slap on the wrist as Biden and Pence have, everything resolved, everyone happy. The dumb thing Trump did was to double-down on his crime, pretended he wasn't guilty, tried to hide the evidence of his crime.

Trump was given every opportunity to "return the documents and we'll say no more about it" but he chose not to do that, thought he could get away with it.

That's why he's been charged, not because it's politically advantageous to charge him.

Trump has handed his opponents the rope with which to hang him. Genius.

On Wed, 12 Jul 2023 08:10:27 GMT
TWP <ngspammersad@yahoo.com> wrote:

> If they prosecute Trump for this it's only fair that Clinton's
> insecure server and phones under the hammer get re-visited. I don't
> see how it's different really - except who is being pursued and why.

How about we put Hillary and Trump in jail ?

Or put Biden and Trump in jail ?

I expect that's not acceptable because it's not about punishing people for wrongdoing it's about protecting Trump from his crimes.

In fact, given that politically-motivated leaks and lies during Clinton's run resulted in her losing her presidential bid, it's actually an argument that Trump should face the same.

This would be the Mutually Assured Destruction you say there should be.

On Tue, 11 Jul 2023 13:11:55 +0100
The Happy Hippy <the.happy.hippy.nntp@ntlworld.invalid> wrote:

> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-66162668
>
> <quote>
>
> Donald Trump has asked for his trial on charges of illegally stashing
> classified documents to be postponed until after the 2024 election.
>
> </quote>
>
> Makes sense. Trump knows support will be diminished if he is found
> guilty of the most serious crimes an American can commit.

Seems he's had his applications to delay the trial dismissed with it scheduled for the 20th May 2024.

That seems a reasonable compromise between prosecutors who say it's a simple open and shut case that could go head immediately and defense who claim it's somehow much more complicated than that.

With Trump on record basically saying 'look at this, it's top secret, not declassified, I could have declassified it but I didn't', I would have thought it a slam dunk on at least one charge.