Trump Has Turned The United States Into A Lawless Rogue State

It was bad enough that Donald Trump was flouting United States laws to gain more power (and wealth) for himself. But now he's decided that's not enough. He has begun to ignore and violate international laws.

Trump's is trying to justify his actions against Venezuela by claiming he is doing it to protect Americans from illegal drugs. That's ridiculous. Grabbing and kidnapping Maduro (and his wife) will do nothing to decrease the amount of drugs available on the streets of the United States. 

Venezuela (and Maduro) was not a major importer of drugs in this country. Other countries are far bigger importers of hard drugs - Colombia and Ecuador (cocaine), China (fentanyl), Afghanistan (heroin). And Trump's pardon of the Honduran president, who was convicted of exporting over 400 tons of hard drugs to the United States, also gives lie to Trump's claim.

The truth is that Trump doesn't care about the drugs or the plight of Venezuelan citizens. He wanted Venezuela's oil reserves - generally considered to be the largest in the world. And he didn't care what he had to do to get them.

Trump's bombing of small boats and killing those on them is a violation of international law (and U.S. due process laws).

Trump's seizing of tanker ships and stealing their oil is a violation of international law.

Trump's bombing of Venezuela and killing of its citizens is a violation of international law (and an act of war).

Trump's kidnapping Of Venezuela's leader is a violation of international law.

And Trump's current attempt to steal Venezuela's oil reserves is a violation of international law.

The United States used to be a freedom-loving country that supported democracies around the world. But Trump has turned it into a lawless rogue state that threatens democracy and world peace. All Americans who love democracy (at home and abroad) should be ashamed of Trump's actions - and dedicate themselves to opposing his lawless regime. 

Most Say Trump Is Definitely/Probably A Criminal (But Won't Be Punished)

These charts are from a YouGov Poll -- done between May 28th and 30th of a nationwide sample of 1,129 adults, with a 3.9 point margin of error. 

It's Official - The Next U.S. President Is A CRIMINAL!

 

Donald Trump was sentenced on Friday for his conviction on 34 counts in a New York court. He will not be jailed or fined, but the sentencing makes it official - Donald Trump is a criminal!

Here, from The Guardian, is what Judge Juan Merchan said in sentencing Trump:

“The protections afforded the office of the president are not a mitigating factor. They do not reduce the seriousness of the crime or justify its commission in any way.”

“The protections are, however, a legal mandate which, pursuant to the rule of law, this court must respect and follow. However, despite the extraordinary breadth of those protections, one power they do not provide is the power to erase a jury verdict.”

"It was the citizenry of this nation that recently decided that once again you should have the benefits of those protections which include, among other things, the supremacy clause and presidential immunity. It is through that lens and that reality that this court must determine a lawful sentence."

"This court has determined that the only lawful sentence that permits entry of judgment of conviction, without encroaching on the highest office of the land is unconditional discharge."

"Therefore, at this time, I impose that sentence to cover all 34 counts."

“Sir, I wish you godspeed as you assume your second term in office.”

Courts Have Already Made It Clear That Trump Is Unfit

The media seems bent on determining whether voters will change their minds about trump if he is convicted of the crimes in three remaining locations - federal crimes in Florida and Washington, D.C. and state crimes in Georgia. I say we should already know the answer - it will not really make a difference.

I say that because courts have already, numerous times, determined that Trump has committed an assortment of crimes. If that hasn't already convinced voters that Trump should not be elected, why would a couple more convictions make a difference.

Consider what courts have already determined that Trump has done:

RACISM: In the 1970's, Trump was determined to be in violation of laws preventing discrimination in housing. He was refusing to rent any of his apartments to Blacks. The Department of Justice filed suit against him. A settlement was reached where Trump agreed to stop the illegal discrimination, and was court-ordered to run ads in the Black community. 

FRAUD: One of the best examples of this was "Trump University". It was supposed to educate students on how to make money in real estate, but it turned out to be just a front for taking their money. A court ordered it be shut down and student money refunded.

THEFT: Trump, and his sons, created a charity that was supposed to help the needy. But the charity turned out to be just another way to enrich himself. Trump used the charity's funds to buy things for himself (including for a portrait of himself). A court ordered the charity to be dissolved and for Trump to disseminate the funds to several real charities.

DEFAMATION: Trump lied and slandered E. Jean Carroll. He was found guilty (twice) and ordered to pay her millions of dollars.

SEXUAL ABUSE: In the defamation trial, it was judged that Trump was actually guilty of sexual abuse (rape) of Ms. Carroll.

ELECTION INTERFERENCE: In the most recent case, Trump was found guilty of 34 felony counts of trying to interfere with an election by paying a porn star to remain silent about their sexual liaison.

If Trump committed the remaining crimes of which he is accused, he should be tried and convicted. But that should not make anyone change their mind. There is already plenty of evidence that Trump is guilty of continuing criminal activity. There is already enough to show that he is unfit to serve in the presidency - or any other government position! 

How Many Trump Convictions Will Wake Up The Voters?

This chart reflects the results of a Reuters / Ipsos Poll -- done between December 5th and 11th of a nationwide sample of 4,411 adults, with a 1.8 point margin of error.

Donald Trump is facing about 91 criminal charges in several different courts. Yet many polls are showing a very close race between Donald Trump and President Joe Biden. According to this poll, Trump would lose big if convicted of a crime -- with 59% saying they would not vote for him.

That has me thinking the voting public seems to have a very short memory. Hasn't Trump already been convicted in several courts of criminal conduct?

A court found that Trump (and his sons) created a fraudulent charity which benefitted only his sons and himself. They were fined and barred from creating another charity.

A court found Trump guilty of creating a fraudulent school. He was ordered to refund the money paid into it by "students".

A court convicted Trump of sexually abusing (raping) E. Jean Carroll, and then defaming her. He was ordered to pay millions in damages.

A court has found Trump guilty of fraud by inflating his property value for insurance and loans, and then deflating it for tax purposes. That court is currently considering how much Trump will have to pay for his guilty conduct.

I will grant you that all of the above convictions were in civil courts, but he could not have been convicted and fined if none of the actions he engaged in were crimes. Fraud is a crime, and so is sexual abuse (rape). Being convicted in a civil court instead of a criminal court doesn't make fraud or sexual abuse any less a crime.

Trump may or may not be convicted in a criminal court for one or all of the 91 indictments he's facing, and it may or may not happen before the November election. But it should not matter. We already know that Trump is a criminal, because he has broken the law.

We have already seen enough. Those who do not want a criminal in the White House should be voting against Trump. His criminal conduct makes him a criminal, whether found true in a civil or criminal court.

Most People Think Trump Is A Criminal

 The chart above is from the Navigator Poll -- done between August 17th and 21st of 1,000 registered voters nationwide. (No moe was given)

Most Say Trump Broke The Law & Threatened Democracy

 

The charts above are from a new AP / NORC Poll -- done between August 10th and 14th of a nationwide sample of 1,165 adults, with a 3.8 point margin of error.

Most Agree With Trump Being Charged

The charts above are from an ABC News / Ipsos Poll -- done on August 2nd and 3rd of a nationwide sample of 1,076 adults, with a 3.4 point margin of error.
 

Most Say Trump Is A Criminal - But GOP Still Loves Him

The charts above are from the NPR / PBS NewsHour / Marist Poll done between July 24th and 27th of a nationwide sample of 1,285 adults, with a 3.6 point margin of error. There were 455 Republicans with a margin of error of 6.1 points.

Most Voters Say Trump's Criminally Responsible For Jan. 6th

The charts above are from the Politico / Morning Consult Poll -- done between December 21st and 24th of a nationwide sample of 2,000 registered voters, with a 2 point margin of error.

2023 Should Bring Indictments For Donald Trump

The following is just part of an excellent op-ed by Colbert I. King in The Washington Post:

I fervently wish that 2023 will bring about a reckoning between Donald Trump and the law; that in the new year, the former president will be called to account for betraying his oath of office — and, if there is sufficient evidence to prove he has committed other crimes, that he be indicted. Neither is too much to hope for, and both are much desired. Trump, who is divisive and demagogic at home and favors autocratic regimes abroad, is the United States’ greatest scourge on public service in the 21st century.

Among U.S. presidents, Trump stands out most for his dereliction of duty.

His oath was simple and direct: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

But on Jan. 6, 2021, when the Capitol — the symbol of U.S. democracy — was assaulted by a mob summoned to Washington by him, Trump did nothing.

It was the most violent domestic attack on the U.S. government since the Civil War. There it was: a mob seeking to delay and disrupt a joint session of Congress empowered by the Constitution to transfer presidential power. . . .

We watched for hours as law enforcement, including a large contingent of courageous D.C. police officers, fought to clear the mob of insurrectionists out of the Capitol and off its grounds.

The president of the United States watched, too. . . .

As commander in chief, Trump had the capacity to marshal the power of the U.S. government to stop the blatant attack on a constitutional process. For more than three hours — 187 minutes, as the committee clocked it — Trump sat back and didn’t lift a finger.

Despite his sworn obligation to “protect and defend the Constitution,” Trump shamefully and shamelessly violated his oath. . . .

The Jan. 6 committee, concluding an 18-month investigation, said Trump did more than sit in the White House and sulk on Jan. 6.

In a referral of criminal charges to the Justice Department, the committee said that the former president, among other things, incited or assisted the Jan. 6 insurrection and obstructed an official proceeding of Congress. The committee unanimously agreed to the referral.

More to the point, Attorney General Merrick Garland has appointed a special counsel to oversee two criminal investigations that involve Trump: First, whether there was any unlawful interference with the transfer of power following the 2020 presidential election or the certification of the electoral college vote, and second, the alleged mishandling of classified documents and other presidential records and possible obstruction of an investigation.

Trump is up to his eyeballs in both.

Partisan GOP grousing and Trump’s witch-hunt claims notwithstanding, the Garland-led Justice Department can be expected to follow the facts and the law in reaching decisions about Trump and his confederates.

Here’s hoping 2023 will see Trump meeting at the bar of justice, with verdicts to follow.

Pelosi's Attacker Is A Q-anon Nut, A Bigot, And A Trumper

It should come as no surprise that the man attacking Mr. Pelosi was a right-wing scumbag. Here's some of what the Los Angeles Times says about him:

In the months before police accused him of attacking House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s husband Friday morning, David DePape had been drifting further into the world of far-right conspiracies, antisemitism and hate, according to a Times review of his online accounts.

In a personal blog that DePape maintained, posts include such topics as “Manipulation of History,” “Holohoax” and “It’s OK to be white.” He mentioned 4chan, a favorite message board of the far right. He posted videos about conspiracies involving COVID-19 vaccines and the war in Ukraine being a ploy for Jewish people to buy land.

DePape’s screeds included posts about QAnon, an unfounded theory that former President Trump is at war with a cabal of Satan-worshipping elites who run a child sex ring and control the world. In an Aug. 23 entry titled “Q,” DePape wrote: “Either Q is Trump himself or Q is the deepstate moles within Trumps inner circle.”. . .

DePape followed a number of conservative creators online, including Tim Pool, Glenn Beck, DailyWire+ and the Epoch Times. He also followed an account on YouTube called Black Pilled and reposted several of its videos on his blog. “Blackpilling” is internet slang for coming to believe supposedly unacceptable facts about society, and the reposted videos include accusations such as the FBI covering up child rape. . . .

When DePape was sounding off about QAnon, he posted: “Remember when the UK arrested parents for trying to rescue their children from being gang banged at pedo rape parties and f— LET the pedo’s CONTINUE their kiddie rape orgies,” he continued.

Another post referenced “pizzagate,” a bogus conspiracy theory that posited that children were trapped in a sexual abuse ring in a Washington, D.C., pizzeria run by Hillary Clinton and a chief aide.

“Pizza gate is connected to Epstien hahahahha,” a post from Aug. 23 read. “My friends would be like pizza gate was debunked their is NO such thing as elite pedophile sex rings and I’m like HELLO Epstein what planet are you on?”

In another, he called “equity” a leftist dog whistle “for the systematic oppression of white people” and “diversity” a “dog whistle for the genocide of the white race.” In others, he posted separate videos questioning the Holocaust and alleging Jewish bankers were responsible for Hitler’s rise to power. . . .

DePape posted videos to Facebook by MyPillow Chief Executive Mike Lindell saying that the 2020 presidential election was stolen, according to reports.

He also linked to sites with claims about the deadliness of COVID-19 vaccines.

Donald Trump Must Be Indicted For His Criminal Behavior

Here is just part of an excellent op-ed by Dana Milbank in The Washington Post: 

We can’t allow ourselves to become numb to the monstrous things Trump did, is still doing, and would do again with more sophistication if he returns to power. Consider just a few revelations tucked in Thursday’s retelling of the grisly tale of Jan. 6:

• Trump adviser Steve Bannon, before the election, declared that Trump is “going to declare victory, and that doesn’t mean he’s the winner. … So when you wake up Wednesday morning, it’s going to be a firestorm.”
• Trump friend and longtime adviser Roger Stone, before the election, said that regardless of the outcome, “the key thing to do is to claim victory. Possession is nine-tenths of the law. No, we won. F--- you. … We’ll have to start smashing pumpkins, if you know what I mean.”
• Trump, knowing privately that he had lost, signed an order on Nov. 11 requiring the immediate withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan and Somalia.
• Trump, acknowledging defeat, told Meadows (according to video testimony from former Meadows aide Cassidy Hutchinson): “I don’t want people to know we lost, Mark. This is embarrassing. Figure it out.”
• Republican National Committee chairwoman Ronna McDaniel, in video testimony, testified about Trump introducing her to lawyer John Eastman, who tried to enlist the RNC’s help with his fake-elector scheme.
• Nancy Pelosi, in newly released video, pleaded for help from the Pentagon, the Virginia governor and the attorney general. She reacted in horror to the violence and talked with Vice President Mike Pence about “defecation” and defilement of the House floor.

In a largely symbolic gesture, the panel closed with a unanimous vote to subpoena documents and testimony from Trump himself. He’ll surely refuse — as did Stone, Eastman and some 30 others who took the Fifth.

“We have sufficient information to consider criminal referrals from multiple individuals,” Vice Chair Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) said — though, as she noted, “the vast weight of evidence presented so far has shown us that the central cause of January 6th was one man: Donald Trump.”

After the overwhelming case the committee has made, a criminal referral that doesn’t name Trump would be criminal.

Texas Has The Worst Attorney General In The Country

I'm sure there are some other bad attorney generals in some states, but none can match Ken Paxton of Texas in both idiocy and criminality. Here's what James Hohmann says about Paxton in The Washington Post:

Ken Paxton, the Republican attorney general of Texas, has been under felony indictment for securities fraud since 2015, and a judge has ordered him to sit for a deposition in the case next month. He is under FBI investigation for assisting a real estate developer who allegedly hired his mistress and remodeled his home. Four of Paxton’s former top lieutenants are suing to get their jobs back, saying they were fired in violation of the Texas Whistleblower Act for reporting potential crimes by the attorney general to the feds.

No Democrat has won statewide in Texas since 1994, and former congressman Beto O’Rourke is extremely unlikely to win his race against Gov. Greg Abbott. Beating Paxton should have been Democrats’ best chance to end the drought. But they nominated former ACLU lawyer Rochelle Garza, whose claim to fame is helping a 17-year-old undocumented immigrant get an abortion while in federal custody.

Paxton now appears likely to be reelected next month as the chief law enforcement officer in a state of nearly 30 million people. Meanwhile, the Texas State Bar’s Commission for Lawyer Discipline is seeking court sanctions against him for peddling false claims of voter fraud after the 2020 election. It was Paxton who filed Texas’s frivolous lawsuit seeking to throw out the votes of Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan and Wisconsin. After the U.S. Supreme Court rejected the case, Paxton warmed up the crowd for President Donald Trump at the “Stop the Steal” rally on Jan. 6, 2021, that preceded the Capitol insurrection.

Just 34 percent of Texans think Paxton has the integrity to serve as attorney general, according to a poll conducted last month by the Dallas Morning News and the University of Texas at Tyler, including only 50 percent of Republicans. But Paxton led Garza by seven points in the same survey because 68 percent of Republicans nevertheless plan to vote for him.

Paxton has filed as many lawsuits challenging President Biden’s policies as anyone, including about a dozen on immigration alone, which plays to his advantage. He has earned loyalty from social conservatives as an outspoken foe of reproductive rights. He recently ran away from someone serving him a subpoena in a case seeking to clarify whether abortion rights groups will be liable for helping women cross state lines to access care. A federal judge has ordered Paxton to testify in that suit.

Paxton announced in June that he would defend Texas’s long-unenforced law against sodomy if the Supreme Court followed Justice Clarence Thomas’s suggestion to “correct the error” of its 2003 decisionin Lawrence v. Texas, which struck down a 1973 state law criminalizing gay sex.

This fixation on cultural issues might have distracted Paxton from the core responsibilities of his job. The Associated Press reports that his office recently dropped a series of human trafficking and child sexual assault cases after losing track of one of the victims. The story also revealed that a Paxton adviser was quietly let go after less than two months on the job when he showed child pornography during a staff meeting.

“One prosecutor said he quit in January after supervisors pressured him to withhold evidence in a murder case. Another attorney signed a resignation letter in March that warned of growing hostility toward LGBTQ employees,” according to the Associated Press.

That office drama followed a 2020 revolt by senior staff. Eight former deputies accused Paxton of abusing power, accepting bribes and tampering with government documents. Everyone who reported Paxton was either fired or left under pressure. Among the allegations was that Paxton, who otherwise opposed covid-related restrictions, invoked the public health emergency to issue an opinion in the middle of the night that delayed a foreclosure sale for one of the developer’s properties.

Paxton issued a 374-page report last August that he claimed exonerates him and argues that he has the right to fire any appointees for any reason. He denies all wrongdoing in every case and, channeling Trump, cries that he’s the victim of a “witch hunt.” He’s said he’s being persecuted by “the Biden FBI,” even though the investigation began when Trump was still president and Trump appointed the current FBI director. Paxton’s campaign did not respond to requests for comment, including an interview request.

Garza highlights Paxton’s ethics problems on the stump, but abortion is what animates her. The Morning News poll showed the limits of this issue: Texans are evenly split over whether Roe v. Wade should have been overturned, and 49 percent believe abortion should be illegal in most or all cases. As a result, no prominent Republican has endorsed Garza.

Paxton is so well-positioned that he is not even bothering to air television commercials in what has been a frustratingly sleepy contest. He doesn’t publicize campaign events and mostly restricts appearances to friendly MAGA outlets. Last month, Trump appeared at a Paxton fundraiser in Bedminster, N.J.

The former president has been Paxton’s ace up his sleeve. His support is how Paxton held off a well-funded primary challenge from George P. Bush this past spring, and it’s why he’s favored to win a third term next month despite being the worst attorney general in the United States. Tribalism is a hell of a drug. 

Legal Troubles Continue To Mount For Donald Trump

The following op-ed is by Jennifer Rubin in The Washington Post:

If you want to understand why New York Attorney General Letitia James’s civil lawsuit against Donald Trump and others in his business is so ominous for the former president, turn to Paragraph 5 of her complaint.

The numerous financial misrepresentations by Trump and his companies, the complaint states, “violated a host of state criminal laws, constituting repeated and persistent illegality in violation of Executive Law § 63(12),” referring to New York’s civil fraud statute. “Among other laws, Defendants repeatedly and persistently violated the following: New York Penal Law § 175.10 (Falsifying Business Records); Penal Law § 175.45 (Issuing a False Financial Statement); and Penal Law § 176.05 (Insurance Fraud).”

Trump and his family have repeatedly denied wrongdoing. Trump attorney Alina Habba said in a statement on Wednesday, “Today’s filing is neither focused on the facts nor the law — rather, it is solely focused on advancing the Attorney General’s political agenda.”

In any case, James’s complaint is a shot across the bow of the hapless Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, who so far seems to have failed to find a basis to pursue criminal charges against the Trump Organization, leading to the resignation of experienced prosecutors Carey Dunne and Mark Pomerantz. (Bragg claimed on Wednesday that the criminal investigation is “ongoing.”)

Norman Eisen, who served as co-counsel for the House Judiciary Committee during Trump’s first impeachment and authored multiple analyses on Trump’s potential civil and criminal exposure, tells me, “Whatever Mr. Bragg’s failures, the Southern District of New York is not known for turning its back on evidence of serious crimes.” Indeed, fact-finding in civil litigation could offer fodder in criminal investigations.

In other words, the same facts set out in James’s complaint could lead to a host of federal charges, including federal bank, tax and wire fraud. And remember, this would be in addition to possible criminal cases concerning Trump’s mishandling of top-secret documents stashed at Mar-a-Lago, his actions leading up to the Jan. 6, 2021, coup attempt and his attempt to pressure Georgia officials to overturn the state’s election results.

As Eisen wrote for Just Security with E. Danya Perry and Joshua Stanton, “At some point, the aggregate effect of all these investigations will reach a tipping point.… The cumulative weight bearing down upon a possible defendant — whether corporate, individual, or both — at some point becomes unsustainable.”

Even before the New York civil case reaches a settlement or verdict, financial firms are now on notice of potential misconduct and may cease doing business with Trump. If, for example, banks begin to exercise their rights to call in loans based on financial covenants they believe were violated, financial turmoil and even bankruptcy become real possibilities. (No financial institution wants to be the last in line to get its money out.)

Consider the myriad ways in which a civil suit of this magnitude might impact Trump:

• If he loses his ability to do business in New York for five years, as James seeks, his financial empire would be essentially kaput. He might lose the right to control multiple properties, including Trump Tower and Trump National Golf Club Westchester. He might retain properties elsewhere, but if James’s allegations are correct, they would be worth far less than he has claimed. For example, the complaint alleges that Trump’s Mar-a-Lago, “was valued as high as $739 million based on the false premise that it was unrestricted property and could be developed and sold for residential use ... In reality, the club generated annual revenues of less than $25 million and should have been valued at closer to $75 million.”
• Bragg may feel compelled to reconsider his lack of interest in the case against Trump’s business, as James boldly urges him to do.
• Trump’s already enormous legal bills may become unmanageable, even for someone adept at squeezing gullible supporters for cash. That could make it difficult for Trump to formally declare his candidacy for president, since he wouldn’t be able to rely on self-funding his campaign.

In sum, Trump’s entire claim to fame as a financial “genius” may soon lie in ruins. His fortune, political power and ability to garner attention might slip away. And if so, he would finally have faced accountability for his actions.

Nearly Half Say Trump Should Face Criminal Charges

The chart above reflects the results of a YouGov Poll -- done between August 20th and 23rd of a nationwide sample of 1,500 adults, with a 3 point margin of error.

Trump's Criminality Proven - When Will The DOJ Act?

 

There is no doubt that Donald Trump tried to overthrow a fair and legal election. It was just one of his criminal actions. Anyone not a member of his cult knows that. The question now is when, if at all, will the Department of Justice act and file charges against Trump?

The following op-ed is by Glenn Kirschner at MSNBC.com:

For weeks, if not months, leadership at the Department of Justicehas repeatedly told us they will follow the facts and the law and will hold Jan. 6 wrongdoers accountable “at any level.” Yet they provide few updates or concrete information. We have seen zero overt law enforcement activity against anyone but the foot soldiers of former President Donald Trump’s insurrection. In substance, the DOJ is asking the American people to trust them. But following the House’s final (at least for a while) Jan. 6 committee hearing on Thursday, that trust is eroding.

Over the course of these eight public Jan. 6 committee hearings, we have seen compelling (not circumstantial) evidence of Trump’s potential crimes. Former acting Deputy Attorney General Richard Donoghue testified that Trump told a group of department officials that it didn’t matter if the election was rife with fraud, adding, “just say the election was corrupt and leave the rest to me and the Republican congressmen.” This is direct evidence — relayed by Donoghue under oath — of criminal intent. Trump apparently neither believed nor cared whether there was provable evidence of widespread election fraud, he simply wanted his DOJ officials to lie — "just say the election was corrupt" — and let him use that lie to help steal a second presidential term.

Former Attorney General Eric Holder described these statements as a “smoking gun” proving Trump’s corrupt intent, adding that it would be “laughable” for anyone to argue otherwise to a jury. I agree wholeheartedly with Holder. (Full disclosure: He was my direct boss when he was the United States attorney for the District of Columbia.) And for anyone who might dismiss Holder as hopelessly partisan, it’s worth remembering that before he served as U.S. attorney for D.C., he was nominated to the Superior Court of the District of Columbia — by President Ronald Reagan.

Similarly, Cassidy Hutchinson testified that prior to Trump's Jan. 6 speech on the Ellipse, he was informed that some of his supporters were armed with rifles, pistols and other deadly weapons. In a staggering display of callousness and disregard for the safety of others, Trump responded by demanding that security take down the metal detectors and let his supporters in anyway, because “they’re not here to hurt me.” As a career prosecutor, I would argue that the only reasonable inference from that statement is that Trump fully understood his armed supporters were a danger to lawmakers certifying the election win of his opponent. Trump also said that after his speech (i.e., after the metal detectors were removed and his armed mob was allowed in), they would all then march to the Capitol. This is powerful, direct evidence — relayed by Hutchinson under oath — that Trump intended to lead an armed mob to stop the election certification.

As we’ve watched this staggering — and, I’d hasten to add, legally admissible — evidence of Trump’s alleged crimes accumulate, DOJ inaction feels increasingly inexcusable.

Add to that the alarming recent New York Times reporting claiming Hutchinson’s testimony “jolted” the DOJ into a more direct consideration of Trump’s potential criminal responsibility. This revelation prompted former federal prosecutor Andrew Weissmann to accuse the DOJ of a “myopic focus on the Jan. 6 riot,” with too few signs of a “robust (DOJ) investigation.”

Even former U.S. Attorney (and MSNBC Columnist) Barb McQuaid, a long-time federal prosecutor with impeccable credentials and a healthy dose of circumspection, is now asking, “DOJ, you up yet?”

Lawlessness, unaddressed, begets lawlessness. And we now see Team Trump engaging in possible witness tampering as well. Given the lack of DOJ action, there seems to be no serious deterrence in place.

And to be clear, if the revelations of Donoghue and Hutchinson, detailed above, are smoking-gun evidence, witness tampering is loaded-gun evidence. Professionally, I’ve had far too many chances to deal with instances of such meddling. Corruptly attempting to influence, impede or prevent the truthful testimony of a witness strikes right at the very heart of the integrity of any investigation, congressional or criminal. Prosecutors take these allegations seriously, and investigate them as quickly as possible.

Is federal law enforcement doing the same?

Lest we forget, the House voted to hold Mark Meadows in contempt of Congress for refusing to appear before the Jan. 6 committee. Meadows, Trump's former chief of staff, appeared so determined to conceal Trump’s behavior that he risked possible criminal charges. But DOJ declined to indict. In a legal sense, I think DOJ should be looking at Meadows not only for the crime of contempt of Congress but also the federal offenses of accessory after the fact and misprision of a felony. In a lay sense, Meadows certainly appears to be involved in a cover-up. And still, he has been given a pass.

This failure to charge Meadows, Trump or any of the other Trump associates who seem to be in the thick of the corrupt efforts to overthrow our democracy exposes a deep injustice presently at play.

The testimony of defendant Stephen Ayres during the last hearing highlighted the DOJ’s disparity of treatment. Trump deceived, duped and lied to the American people, telling them their votes were stolen, the presidential election was corrupt, urging them to come to D.C. for a “wild” protest and then whipping them into a frenzy and instructing them to fight like hell.

Thousands of loyal supporters believed these lies and acted on these commands. And now, hundreds upon hundreds of his supporters are being prosecuted, convicted and imprisoned for doing precisely what their president told them to do.

And where is Donald Trump? Golfing and holding rallies at which he still pushes the big lie, inciting and enraging those who still choose to listen to a two-bit conman. And almost a year and a half after Joe Biden’s inauguration, Wisconsin state Assembly Speaker Robin Vos says Trump called him this very month and pushed him to try to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election.

Such inequity is a stain on our government.

Now, I have long cautioned that we should give the DOJ enough time to do its thing. But my view has always been premised on the assumption that DOJ has, indeed been doing a thorough, far-reaching, aggressive investigation behind the scenes. My growing concern with each new data point is that for reasons that may have little to do with the facts or the law, DOJ is not doing the kind of investigation our democracy needs to survive.

Charges Need To Be Filed Against Trump For His Crimes

The following op-ed is by Jonathan Bernstein at Bloomberg News:

As former President Donald Trump moves toward formally announcing his 2024 candidacy for another term in the White House, it’s becoming more and more obvious that he should be prosecuted for his attempts to overturn the 2020 election.

This isn’t something that should be undertaken lightly. Attempting to imprison a former president — especially one who is a leading candidate for the presidential nomination of his party — is something that should be reserved for the gravest circumstances. People will say that the rule of law requires presidents to be prosecuted just as any other citizen would be, but it really is more complicated than that.

The Justice Department says that it investigates crimes, not people, and that’s the way it should be. Nobody should want the Justice Department to be turned against the leaders of out-parties for offenses that would never have been charged against anyone else. The justice system depends on prosecutors using their discretion properly, so that the immense power of the government isn’t used to hound people over trivial or technical details, and that really needs to apply even more to political leaders — especially from the party that does not control the White House.

That’s why it’s so awful that Trump encourages chants to “lock up” his political opponents.

I’m also only somewhat impressed by arguments about deterring future presidents from committing crimes. It’s not clear to me that the possibility of prosecution and imprisonment would ever be the main thing keeping presidents from breaking the law. Political consequences are paramount to most presidents, who have spent most of their lives trying to reach the White House. Trump may not care that he was impeached twice and provoked the first-ever same-party conviction votes in the Senate, but if so he’s probably unique among presidents in that way. I suspect that Richard Nixon cared more that he was driven out of the presidency and politically humiliated than he would have been about a prison term.

And yet …

Trump didn’t commit ordinary crimes (well, he probably did, and that weighs on all of this too, but it’s not the main thing). He attempted to overturn an election that he had lost, and used the presidency to do so. That’s become clearer and clearer as the House committee investigating the assault on the US Capitol of Jan. 6, 2021 has presented its case. 

Experts seem to believe that the evidence is there and that conviction is likely for Trump’s efforts to pressure election officials to falsify results, to gin up slates of fake electors and to provoke the Capitol mob. And it’s highly relevant that Trump to this day, long after the election, continues to try to overturn the legitimate result. Prosecutors should take it into account if a person constantly takes to the biggest stages and in effect brags about his crimes and promises to commit them again if he has the chance.

The possibility that Trump supporters would respond to an indictment with violence or political sabotage should not constrain prosecutors. It’s one thing to work hard to preserve the ideal of equal justice under the law. It’s another to be cowed by extra-constitutional threats.

There’s a fair argument that the proper venue for all of this was Congress, and that impeachment, conviction and disqualification from holding further office would have been sufficient. But whether it’s correct or not, that ship has sailed.

If all of this sounds as if the ultimate decision by the Justice Department will be political in nature … well, that’s correct. Prosecutors have to balance the threat to the nation from indicting a former president against the threat to the nation of not doing so. Given the facts we’ve seen, it’s just not that hard a choice. Trump’s crimes are too important, and too dangerous, to ignore.