Googling, it seems that lawyers don’t like it, but the defendant can make a plea and then waive the right to attend the trial.
One concern I have is that he can’t get a fair trial due to massive prejudicial pre-trial publicity. This thread is not reassuring in that respect.
Also, there’s a timing problem in that he plans to run for office again. This will probably cause any trial to be delayed for fear of interfering with an election.
How convenient! Want to break the law? Make sure your crime is public and then Tweet about how they’re out to get you all day every day and you’re trial proof!
And on the other side of the aisle, in 2020 it looked like Biden’s campaign was dead until the voters in North Carolina gave him the big win. Did the powers that be in the Democratic Party manipulate those voters somehow?
You are in a full blown thread hijack here. Stop now. There are plenty of other threads to discuss how Trump came into power. This is not one of them. Thanks.
Ethical law enforcement workers have a hard job. Criminals usually get away with most crimes. An example: My impression is that Trump has committed many crimes over a period of decades, and he has gotten to age 76 without spending a day in jail.
Indicting when there is little chance of conviction is a misuse of government resources, and, in this case, would be a gift to a bad man.
He’ll never be convicted of a federal felony – hopefully they are thinking along other lines.
My apologies for the smart-assedness of my remark. The serious answer would be that I presume that the RNC has some power, some levers to manipulate, that can subtly influence the nomination process. They could pass a party by-law prohibiting any twice-impeached former presidents from getting any financial resources.
Has Trump ever been indicted before? The Trump Organization was indicted last year, along with Allan Weisselberg, but I can’t recall a time when Trump himself has been indicted for, say, fraud.
He’s been sued civilly many times, of course, for what might well have been crimes had they been prosecuted, but I expect that there are few instances of criminal indictments on his record - probably because of the higher standard of proof required in criminal cases.
Perhaps there is a greater chance of conviction when the bar for indictment has been crossed. In any event, as they say, past performance is no guarantee of future results.
How is retrial harassment if the evidence is objectively overwhelming, and only politically-motivated jury nullification has led to a hung jury? It seems to me that the “value system of the career prosecutors” should be to prosecute people who are obviously guilty, not to allow them to evade justice for purely political reasons.
