>

More like should be
When? In 2078? >

The day after he dies... "we were going to indict him tomorrow, I guess we'll just have to move on now". -Garland >

thats 100% the plan, people need to start to realize trump won, and he will die an old, rich, free man. >

You guys need to have some optimism. We are seeing convictions for sedition, depositions from high officials etc. It's moving up the ladder and will get to trump. This is the first time they are attempting to prosecute someone who had the most powerful position in the free world. It is going to take time, but I believe justice will be served. >

It’s been 2 fucking years and we’re almost in the next election cycle. They waited too goddam long. >

Too many moving parts.  One way or another it will happen, my only question is 'what happens if they convict him.'  This could be an issue, hopefully not. >

what makes you so sure? Honest question. >

I'm not sure if they will.  I asked, 'what happens IF they convict him.'  My guess is that they DQ him from running first, which in my view, is a victory for the country.  After that I don't know, I'm in the camp that there might be violence if you throw him in jail so perhaps telling him you can't play in 'the system' anymore pretty much ends him and keeps the peace, hopefully... >

There might be violence if you don't throw him in jail too. Not by people angry he's not in jail. By people emboldened by Trump getting away with it. >

Trump could be charged for so many things.  Sedition.  Tax fraud.  Racketeering.  Etc.  Seems like they are always asking if they should charge him.  I'm sure a significant majority of Americans are screaming CHARGE HIM.  Yet all we get is whiny questions about whether he could be charged.  Spineless prosecutors. >

He’ll probably never be charged, especially in a red state. Outside of how much money he spends on fighting stuff in court, he has supporters who will do crazy things for him and if the executive or legislative branch of your state gov won’t have your back (it’d probably be political suicide) then you could be in significant danger. 
Even at the federal level, there would be numerous nut jobs trying to kill you if you really went after Trump. If you don’t have an ironclad case (few are) that you could get threw quickly (also not going to happen because trumps legal tactic is delay, delay, delay. A normal popular legal tactic among the rich that attempts to make it impossible for the opposing party to afford seeing the case through) then why risk it? >

I don't disagree with a thing you said.  But my commitment here is such that I'd rather see this country in deep unrest over the trial and conviction of Trump than exist in a country that is content with the minority rule of radicals.  Just me I suppose.... >

No that’s a perfectly reasonable thought, I’m just of the opinion that there’s an inherent risk that said unrest won’t stop until there isn’t a country left or worse. People are quick to say ‘it can’t happen here’ and as soon as it does they think we’ve hit the low point, but I guarantee you we can and will go lower given the proper conditions. For people who want trump jailed, I think the best bet is to see how these upcoming 2024 primaries play out. If DeSantos wins (not a fan of him either, talk about virtue signaling) it will deteriorate Trumps base significantly, imo, and at that point even fellow republicans will be open to punishing trump for his misdeeds.
It’ll be akin to how basically everyone has turned on George W Bush at this point. >


I’m just of the opinion that there’s an inherent risk that said unrest won’t stop until there isn’t a country left or worse.

I still would rather exist in that country than the one where 33% of this country continuously rules the other 66%.  That's gonna lead to massive unrest by itself.  Why let it fester till it explodes?  Arrest, try, and convict Trump.  Let the chips of freedom fall where they may...... >

Well unless the SC is expanded that 33% will have de facto rule over the country for a looooong time given the age and makeup of the court, who have already shown a proclivity to legislate from the bench, facts of the case be damned. >

True.  The SC can try to judge the country into a Christian Conservative government.  Perhaps even a Theocracy.  Don't think the country will allow that though.  SC is already on the precipice of being ignored due to their removal of Roe.  One or two more decisions like that will make them nearly impotent. >

The SC is not on the precipice of being ignored, and I don’t think anyone would want that kind of precedent set anyway. Just look at a country like Israel where the SC said Netanyahu should be tried for corruption and they were ignored. Luckily there seems to be somewhat of a balance returning there as Netanyahu did comply with a SC ruling that he must fire a minister who was ordered by a judge, after a criminal conviction, to stay out of politics.
What our SC is  just a few more vastly unpopular opinions away from, imo, is the expansion of the court being taken seriously and something people campaign on instead of leaving as a maybe.
To your first point the SC has already dipped their toe in the water of forcing Conservative Christianity on our country and with little regard for civil procedure or precedent. I’m referring to the high school assistant football coach who was suspended after he refused to comply with his HC telling him not to hold prayer on the field as it was becoming a distraction and brought a state politician with him on to the field to do it. His case he brought to the courts was that he was fired and so it was thrown out at the lower levels for not stating a proper cause of action but the SC took it up when given the option anyway (even though it goes against the most basic rules of civil procedure) and then when they put out their legislation from the bench the assistant coach didn’t even follow through with what he was awarded (the court forced the school system to reinstate him) and is instead making a killing on the conservative speaking tour circuit. >

The SC is on the edge of being irrelevant.  Roe put them on that edge.  Imagine they rule that gays can't marry.  That LBGTQ don't have rights.  That school prayer and even religious classes are allowed.  That access to contraception is denied.  That states have the right to pick a winning candidate no matter what the vote, or even if there is no vote.  Just sit back for a minute, close your eyes, and think about it.  Now, tell me that's a SC that is going to be followed by America.
No.
We will split into two Americas.  One with states that will follow the SC. And one with states that will not.
Count on it. >

It depends on who the commander in chief is. People were saying the same argument in regards to slavery being ended and a lot of Americans (even in the north) weren’t cool with it, but Abe was willing to put the power he had behind doing the right thing. It depends on if the CIC is willing to do the wrong thing. >

Change the headline to 'Trump Charged With Racketeering", or better yet 'Trump In Jail',  then we'll talk. >

Could he? Abso-fucking-lutley.
Will he? I truly doubt it. 
What kind of precedent would that set? Showing the great unwashed masses that the upper class is held to the same standards? Madness. /s >

Any day now...
tHe wAllS aRe cLosIng iN! >

It’s been the better part of a decade. Nothings fucking happening >

Do you know how long a decade is and how long ago the 2020 election was and what "the better part of" means >

2022 minus 2016 equals 6 >

It was the 2020 election this happened in, not the 2016
Been a little over 2 years >

At this point, its on you for not understanding the first comment. >

Maybe learn to communicate better. A comment like that under an article talking about a specific charge will be understood to be about the specific charge. >

Unless maybe, just maybe, there's a larger context and pattern of criminality being addressed.
Tried to explain it with math and you failed that too. You are arguing against the 'intent' of a comment that was made. The intent was obvious and explained multiple times by multiple people. What they meant to say isn't wrong because you misunderstood it. What are you even arguing at this point? Ridiculous. Maliciously incompetent.
Bad faith. >

The intent of the comment was low IQ doomerism regurgitated “garland does nothing, power never faces consequences,  this is the fault of capitalism” 
We get it, you hate power and capitalism. >

If he was to be charged with anything it would’ve already happened, it Never will happen >

If he was a Democrat, he would have been charged two years ago. But since he's a rethuglican and the Dems have a medical problem (not guts) he's still not charged with anything. >

Yeah, because dems get charged with shit all the time, right? >

When they do something wrong? Yeah, or they resign. >

Pathetic. Just do it if you can, already. When does it get old? The same idiots that get excited about this are the same idiots that believe he’s still going to be indicted for Russian collusion in 2016. >

"Redditor thinks Trump should be charged with Treason" >

While he certainly put the nation far below himself and every shiny thing that caught his short-term attention, “treason” is not something a county prosecutor can charge. 
The more you know… >

"Redditor didn't mention county prosecutor in comment, simply stated their opinion that Trump should be charged with Treason which he assumed most people would understand since they're fully aware of how state vs federal laws work and state prosecutors clearly don't have that power.  In retrospect redditor realizes that although they didn't think they were implying the prosecutor should charge him with Treason, it could be unclear to some as it's a post about this prosecutors opinion.   Redditor regrets not being more clear in their short one sentence quip and their overestimation of the intellect of other Redditors.    Redditor appreciates the clarifying statement by other redditor."   
Cheers!!
Reddit!!!  :-) >

if I had a dollar for every time i read "Trump charged with..." i would be richer than Nancy Pelosi... >

And if you waited until he was actually charged, you would be as old as Nanci Pelosi. >

Could, should, maybe, possible and all the other BS.
Until it's "IS CHARGED" and hopefully "IS CONVICTED" I'm out.  Americans were already teetering on the edge regarding our faith in the justice system.  At this point it's gone. >

Narrator: No. For the 361,784,538^th time, no. >

It's not ~~lupus~~ The RICO. >

Yeah, people have been SCREAMING for a RICO case for some years now… >

Brilliant! "Stop the steal" is definitely a racketeering organization.with those at the top trying to get others to do the dirty work. A Georgia indictment would not be subject to a future presidential pardon. >

Of course he can he could have been back a few years ago when it came out him and Marlago (or whatever) where threaten people’s visa. Specially codified racket in the RICO law. >

He "could be" charged with countless crimes.  We've ALL been saying this literally for decades.  Yet......he's running for president again.   USA continually proves to be the stupidest country going >

How? >

General strike would be best. >

General strike for prosecuting Trump? Lmao.
People are not doing this for their own problems so good luck organizing it. >

It would work in a matter of days. The only thing those in power listen to is the economy. >

2023 and nothing... >

For all he’s done there’s been zero charges. Teflon Don. These articles are getting boring because nothing comes from them. >

Generally you file charges after you have completed your investigations. >

No no no. This will not do. You're not supposed to have common sense. You're not supposed to know how the law works. Get outta of this subreddit. /s
But seriously, these cynics really be like "JUst dO It aLrEaDy", "aRrEsT TRuMp nOw" when the investigation isn't even finished yet. The pessimists are embarrassing themselves with their whining and moaning.
We don't know what will happen in the investigation or when it will finish until there's news about it, so they and everyone else will have to wait. >

It's been 2 years since J6. How many more are they going to need? Will it even matter by that time? The dudes already running for 2024, and he's old as hell, just a few years out from dying a free man. >

Oh my god will this sub ever get tired of posting the same bullshit articles over and over again? >

Will he? No. >

Coulda woulda shoulda >

We hear stuff like this so often it’s a joke at this point. I’ll believe it when I see it, this is pointless. >

80% of the posts on this sub are hypotheticals, or things that have not yet happened.
“A politician vowed to _,” “A politician said, ‘Someone should really fix _’,” “Sources say that Trump is really in for it this time!” and on and on. 
I guess that’s smart, because when the propagandists running this sub venture out of the hypotheticals and into reality they are usually wrong (like when they spent a year pushing false Rittenhouse narratives and then had to ban any mention of Rittenhouse once the verdict came out). >

If Trump did anything illegal, he would be in jail. These prosecutors fail time and time again to surmount enough evidence to justify putting him in jail. Their approach has been guilty until proven innocent and it has grown both tiring and wasteful of resources. >

Two more weeks, you'll get him >

What are they waiting for? >

They were waiting for the special grand jury to complete their investigation and prepare a report, which happened last week, and for the report to be reviewed in a hearing, which happened yesterday.  
Now Willis has to convene a regular grand jury and convince them to indict.  I think that's all we're waiting for at this point in Georgia. >

Do it >

Now >

This is like waiting for the goddam white walkers. I hope I’m wrong but I assume when it arrives it will be insultingly disappointing. >

All of you corrupt public officials should be charged with racketeering >

Then if you go after one don’t stop there. Finish off by going after every other politician. Starting at the white house and going down from there >

downvote anything with "could" "should" "maybe" "might" in the headline. >

Or allegedly >

I just laugh at these articles… >

Lmao yeah she the wicked witch of the south and she giving everyone Ricos 😂 >

Is there a way to pressure a vote to remove garland? What is this motherfucker doing? At least go after the obstruction charges.  Wtf is going on??? >

I swear your guys are pathetic at this point. >

Let’s see the evidence oh wait… >

Whew, thought they were gona say he fucked that black lady :D >

She found out about RICO and hasn’t had rest since >

He loves playing mob boss, let him be one. >

Could be charged with
Coup
Tax fraud
Money laundering 
Rape
Sex with a minor 
Espionage 
Conspiracy 
Obstruction
Bribery 
Racketeering 
But doesn’t mean anything if he isn’t charged >

“A Georgia prosecutor” haven’t read the article but the photo is the district attorney. Lol I don’t know why but that phrasing ticks me off 😑 >

RICO is exactly what trump should be getting. Giuliani, the anti-mafia RICO god himself, should also get indicted. The irony would be so so sweet. 
If young thug is getting RICOd then trump DEFINITELY should be getting RICOd >

"Could" is not news. >

doDoItDOIT >

The FBI admitted trump commited a crime in the stormy case.  Never charged not even after leaving office. >

Ok. Do it. >

Donald Trump has the 3 stooges syndrome but with crimes instead of diseases
“DOCTOR: Mr. Burns, I’m afraid you are the sickest man in the United States. You have everything.
MR. BURNS: You mean, I have pneumonia?
DOCTOR: Yes.
MR. BURNS: Juvenile diabetes?
DOCTOR: Yes.
MR. BURNS: Hysterical pregnancy?
DOCTOR: A little bit, yes. You also have several diseases that have just been discovered in you.
MR. BURNS: I see. You’re sure you just haven’t made thousands of mistakes?
DOCTOR: No, I’m afraid not.
MR. BURNS: Well, this sounds like bad news.
DOCTOR: Well, you’d think so, but all of your diseases are in perfect balance. If you have a moment, I can explain. Here is the door to your body. And these are oversized novelty germs. That’s influenza, that’s bronchitis … Here’s what happens when they all try to get through the door at once. [Impersonates the Three Stooges] Move it, chowder head! We call it “Three Stooges Syndrome.”” >

Please please please!  Someone charge him for his actions! >

RICO Baby! An ongoing criminal conspiracy. With Lindsey Graham and Four Seasons Rudy. And don't forget Mike (Prison beds are hard) Lindell. >

I said halfway through his presidency that they should open a RICO case against him. Which ran into the problems of just how many active politicians would be taken down. I responded with he did promise to drain the swamp he could keep that promise by falling this way. >

At the start, i said there's no way a large real estate guy could survive it legally. Every single real estate guy at his level is corrupt as heck. >

Listen to Opening Arguments podcast. They give great legal insight into Trump's criminal culpability as well as deep dives into other interesting legal takes. >

Can someone just please charge him for his life of crime? Just pick a crime and do it >

"A Georgia prosecutor thinks so"
I love it