What were you THINKING?

[Disinfectus]

Food for thought regarding Philly Guy:

@PhillyGuy

As for Trump, I generally think he’s a crook. But without hearing the testimony and judge’s instructions, I don’t buy him being definitely guilty of what he’s accused of. IMHO prosecutors often overreach.

@PhillyGuy

Trump was aquitted in the Senate. If the Republicans on the Supreme Court want to help him a bit, they can point this out. Reading the constitution literally, they will be correct. And from a civil liberties perspective, I do not want to see the double-jeopardy clause diluted.

@PhillyGuy

I wonder if I would have more support in my views here if Biden was the one who had been acquitted by the Senate and was then facing a second trial in a jurisdiction where most people voted against him. It may happen!

Perhaps some care more about Trump being held accountable than others in the future being treated fairly. I admit to the opposite priority. Better to let ten guilty go free than to punish one innocent.

@PhillyGuy

But if they are thinking of declaring Trump an insurrectionist for ballot access purposes, they are going to be too busy next month to spend a lot of time on the Jack Smith situation. And if they think they will actually end Trump’s political career, there is no reason to rush his trials.

@PhillyGuy

Charge him with violating the Espionage Act, and you are handing him another big win, just like the Democrats did with impeachment.

Charge him with stealing a few papers rightfully the property of the Nation Archives, and that might get an actual deserved conviction.

@PhillyGuy

Thinking you are going to punish Trump with a unanimous jury trial conviction is as delusional as the idea the an impeachment acquittal would hurt him. We need to stop giving him wins. The Justice Department’s only chance for a criminal conviction is for a misdemeanor where there is no right to a jury trial.

@PhillyGuy

Most crimes do not result in criminal convictions. I’m sure presidents have gotten away with crimes before, and the republic did not fall.

This does not doom us, or anybody.

Now. a false conviction does doom somebody.

I think that punishing someone with years in prison, because they failed to declassify a paper, when that president could have easily done it, is overreaching.

@PhillyGuy

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.

@PhillyGuy

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.

@PhillyGuy

The Justice Department is using the standard government corruption investigative strategy of throughly searching to find the greatest crime that the politician under investigation has committed, and charge him with that. Just like he was a corrupt Illinois governor.

@PhillyGuy

From my understanding, if you are tried and acquitted, it is unfair to hold the indictment against you.