So let him slide? (Frum Atlantic piece)

[cilla4progress]

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/04/trump-criminal-indictment-charges-consequences/673634/

Don’t Indict Trump With This
Now we know what the Manhattan prosecutors have. It’s not enough.

[Fullduplexxx]

1. That's what frum is saying

[Bernardo de La Paz]

3. Fortunately he gets to say, but does not "have a say". . . nt

[Bernardo de La Paz]

2. Prosecutors, are ethically I think, forbidden from colluding on prosecutions

Colluding would be persecution.

Further, by time December rolls around and he might be making his first scheduled court hearing ahead of a January tentatively scheduled trial, ... by that time he may well be charged in more than one other jursidiction.

So I think Frum is worrying a bit too much.

I think Bragg has handled this indictment well and the arrest,perp walk, weigh in, sitting at the table, etc was all done very well. That plus his track record of some important convictions bodes well.

[inthewind21]

4. Persecution??

[Bernardo de La Paz]

7. Not truly, of course, but it would feed into white christian persecution complexes

... and you'd hear no end of it.

But I think there would be existing guidelines for this sort of thing.

[dpibel]

15. What is "colluding" here?

Do you have any sort of cite for your proposition?

The ABA seems to think that cooperation betwixt prosecutors is not merely permitted, but downright encouraged.

(d) Federal, state, and local prosecution offices should develop practices and procedures that encourage useful coordination with prosecutors within the jurisdiction and in other jurisdictions. Prosecutors should work to identify potential issues of conflict, coordinate with other prosecution offices in advance, and resolve inter-office disputes amicably and in the public interest.

I, of course, have no idea whether your ethics guidelines contain something called "collusion" which is different from cooperation and which constitutes "persecution." Eager to see your authority on that.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

17. Interesting. I was speculating & thought I made that clear. Thanks for finding the info. . . nt

[inthewind21]

5. Really

So how many indictment have you prosecuted that gives you this knowledge?

[Ray Bruns]

6. I was going to post something snarky, but I am finally at my wits end with Trump apologists.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

8. Frum is no apologist. That was no apology. He is a Never-Trumper from the get-go

I think he is being a worry-wart.

[BlueCheeseAgain]

9. Yeah, Frum's anti-Trump credentials are well-established.

He's been against him from the very beginning.

Here, Frum seems to be saying what a lot of anti-Trump people are saying-- these charges are a bit technical, and not about the worst things Trump has done (the worst being the January 6 insurrection). It is a little reminiscent of Bill Clinton-- yes, Clinton pretty clearly lied under oath about Monica Lewinsky, but a lot of people's reactions was that it wasn't really that important a case.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

10. Yes, good summary you made. Difference is Clinton didn't lie to tip a close election

I think the election aspect is key and will weigh on the minds of voters.

When Smith lays charges about Jan 6th, these charges will be seen as supporting the other charges, forming a pattern, and not seen as technical or about a trivial matter.

There will be synergy among charges as they pile up, in the public's mind.

[moniss]

16. The media consistently fails

to properly describe the case. They do so purposely. The case and charges are not about the Orange Ruski having an affair with Stormy. It is about fraudulent accounting and committing crimes in furtherance of other criminal behavior. The media knows that reporting that focuses on that doesn't have the sensationalism they crave and can get by running pics and video of Stormy over and over. So it feeds into the GQP defense that "it's all about an affair just like Clinton".

[Bernardo de La Paz]

18. The average media consumer is below average because intelligence skews toward reading. . . nt

[moniss]

24. Right you are and

I find it so appalling that we have come to this point where critical thinking, ability to see nuance, awareness of propaganda techniques, awareness of history, awareness of communication "gymnastics" etc. are all at such a low level in our supposedly informed society.

It is little wonder that politicians/media people can stand and give a long answer to a question or make a statement about something and actually have said nothing but listeners come away feeling "informed".

[Mad_Machine76]

11. Can you believe

how far we've gone from arguing over lying under oath about a consensual adult relationship to inciting an insurrection against the government's legal transfer of power from one President to another?!


Also, Clinton did experience consequences. He was impeached and he paid out some money to Paula Jones and lost his law license for a time. Which is more in terms of consequences that Trump has experienced.

[Walleye]

20. End it was about the election on the Republicans part, the election of Al Gore or Hillary Clinton

[honest.abe]

12. I like Frum but I dont agree with his take on this.

For one thing its likely there will be additional indictments from more serious crimes but that should not stop a indictment on a less serious crime. That makes no sense whatsoever.

Also this statement is misguided..

"Yet it’s unlikely that a normal business owner would have been caught, because such behaviors would scarcely have excited enough prosecutorial interest to motivate an investigation."

Perhaps true but the motivation to investigate is huge in this case since Trump actions were done to help him win the election.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

13. Yes, election is key. Ordinary biz owner or not, a D/R Party nominee is NOT ordinary. .nt

[Fiendish Thingy]

14. Frum makes some valid points

I don’t agree with him 100%, but the truth is, this is the weakest of all the cases. Bragg May still get convictions, but I fully expect Trump’s lawyers to put a lot of effort into splitting hairs over why charging felonies over misdemeanours was warranted.

I’m sort of glad the next hearing isn’t until December, so the media frenzy over this “unprecedented” first indictment can subside in time for them to refocus on further indictments from GA and DOJ, which will hopefully then take up most of the media’s attention between now and August, when the GOP debates begin.

[AZSkiffyGeek]

19. Another Republican complaining about the indictments?

Surprise surprise. They may be Never Trumpers, but they certainly don't seem to want to say something nice about the Democrats trying to bring him down....

[FSogol]

22. Don't stop Al Capone with tax problems, stop him with gangster stuff!

[Walleye]

23. I guess tax evasion was too technical to prosecute Al Capone for

[Model35mech]

25. It's FRUM. So, it's a free-speech issue

that has little to do with the first amendment.