comment: >
  
  I actually think we NEED to do both.
  We need to expose and embarrass him for the conman/traitor that he is AND charge him as such
context: ¿Por qué no los dos? >
  
  Es una pregunta excelente. >
  
  Mierda. My reddit es todos in spañish >
  
  Donde esta la biblioteca? >
  
  
  If there’s evidence of a crime, he should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law; 
  
  The only people saying that he shouldn't are Trump and his defenders.
  
  otherwise, releasing them only results in political embarrassment.
  
  For Trump, no one else. Releasing them is just helping Trump fulfil a campaign promise. >
  
  Why can’t they be both embarrassing and incriminating?  I’d love to see his embarrassed ass go to jail because of it. >
  
  The only caveat I'd put on that is let them be incriminating first. If they need them for evidence I'd prefer they stay sealed until the trial rather than give who ever's foolish enough to think they'll actually get paid for representing Trump an in to try and argue that them being released to the public has prejudiced the jury pool. >
  
  Because those two things are not mutually exclusive and Congress can't criminally charge someone.