DeSantis 2024?

[SheepDog4Life]

We don't want results around here. We want to be mad.

A "charismatic" but lazy orange blowhard or a boring (and boringly effective) leader... INGO tells me the orange is much better.

 

[KG1]

Yes, but there were a number of political commentators that predicted that the panoply of indictments was SPECIFICALLY calculated by Dems to harden support for Trump in the primary, with the goal of multiple indictments prior to the general with Trump losing in a landslide, along with dragging down the House and Senate.

This was more than a year ago and IIRC before DeSantis and many others even entered the primary.

Part One of the supposed Dem strategy has come to pass... but I'm confident that the indictments won't come prior to the election because INGO told me it was not so....

So are you dismissing out of hand the idea that all of these lawfare tactics weren't meant to keep Trump from getting to the general and it backfired on them?

 

[HKFaninCarmel]

So are you dismissing out of hand the idea that all of these lawfare tactics weren't meant to keep Trump from getting to the general and it backfired on them?

What sort of lawfare would any of the challengers face?

If the answer is none, why?

 

[SheepDog4Life]

So are you dismissing out of hand the idea that all of these lawfare tactics weren't meant to keep Trump from getting to the general?

Yup, I've long concurred with the opinion that the federal lawfare was, in part, to ensure Trump was the nominee... NOT to keep him from getting the nomination.

And then to convict him prior to the general so that even a decrepit Biden can beat him easily.

I've advanced and argued that here in various threads but INGO assures me it's not true.

The progs/Dems have long known how to push MAGA's buttons... and how to "push them" into nominating terrible candidates that get obliterated (or lose eminently winnable races) in the general.

 

[KG1]

Yup, I've long concurred with the opinion that the federal lawfare was, in part, to ensure Trump was the nominee... NOT to keep him from getting the nomination.

And then to convict him prior to the general so that even a decrepit Biden can beat him easily.

I've advanced and argued that here in various threads but INGO assures me it's not true.

The progs/Dems have long known how to push MAGA's buttons... and how to "push them" into nominating terrible candidates that get obliterated (or lose eminently winnable races) in the general.

Let me ask you this. Do you not think that other candidates such as DeSantis and Haley got into the race thinking that they could take advantage of the lawfare against Trump that I proposed? I surmise that if they did then they misread the Democrats intentions that you proposed.

 

[KG1]

What sort of lawfare would any of the challengers face?

If the answer is none, why?

Why? I would say because none of the others present quite the threat to them and their agendas like Trump has.

 

[HKFaninCarmel]

Why? I would say because none of the others present quite the threat to them and their agendas like Trump has.

None is true.

If the Dems had a lane to destroy a Republican, they would take it. Remember, Romney is gonna put "y'all in chains."

They don't open themselves up for this sort of insanity. New York may be the unique exception in the property case.

On the plus side, the Trump legal team appears to have improved.

 

[printcraft]

What sort of lawfare would any of the challengers face?

If the answer is none, why?

Impeached over a fake russian dossier paid for by hitlary and you think these new charges are legit?

Yep, they would be perfectly safe in todays political environment of using the doj and fbi to go after political opponents.
demonrats have never used outright lies to win races. They are as pure as the driven snow. Oh wait...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/09/15/harry-reid-lied-about-mitt-romneys-taxes-hes-still-not-sorry/

Yet Reid (D-Nev.) not only refuses to retract the allegation but also seems to take great pride in it. When pressed by CNN's Dana Bash last year about continuing to defend a statement that is not true, Reid responded, "Romney didn't win, did he?"

 

[KG1]

Yup, I've long concurred with the opinion that the federal lawfare was, in part, to ensure Trump was the nominee... NOT to keep him from getting the nomination.

And then to convict him prior to the general so that even a decrepit Biden can beat him easily.

I've advanced and argued that here in various threads but INGO assures me it's not true.

The progs/Dems have long known how to push MAGA's buttons... and how to "push them" into nominating terrible candidates that get obliterated (or lose eminently winnable races) in the general.

The bottom line for me is I'm sticking to the assertion I made several posts ago that other candidates such as DeSantis and Haley jumped into the race in part thinking that what the Democrats were doing would help their chances in the primary and it didn't materialize. In fact, it had the opposite effect of what they were hoping it would.

It's been my whole contention all along that I'm sticking with now from the original post of mine which you quoted that sparked this discussion. I think we are co-mingling different things here which is not to say that both can't be right at the same time. You appear to be talking about the Democrats intention while I'm talking about certain motivational factors for other candidates to enter into the race based on what the Democrats were doing to Trump.

I have no doubt that they were hoping it would increase their chances.

 

[jamil]

What sort of lawfare would any of the challengers face?

If the answer is none, why?

Overton’s window explains this. Media, of course with some help from Trump himself, has successfully created a caricature of Trump that is loathsome to half the population. It’s possible to get away with the lawfare because people agree with the consequences. The same Overton’s window does not exist with the other challengers. Plus, there aren’t the same opportunities. DeSantis hasn’t developed high value Real Estate so there’s no opportunity to claim that he defrauded anyone.

So it’s an issue of perception, where people loath Trump and don’t care if the prosecution is legit (who wouldn’t want to see literally Hitler jailed) and it’s an issue of opportunity.

 

[jamil]

Yup, I've long concurred with the opinion that the federal lawfare was, in part, to ensure Trump was the nominee... NOT to keep him from getting the nomination.

And then to convict him prior to the general so that even a decrepit Biden can beat him easily.

I've advanced and argued that here in various threads but INGO assures me it's not true.

The progs/Dems have long known how to push MAGA's buttons... and how to "push them" into nominating terrible candidates that get obliterated (or lose eminently winnable races) in the general.

I don’t think anyone knew that hitting Trump with lawfare would actually make him stronger. I think, rather, it was always intended to prevent him from winning the general election, given that he would win the primaries. They did the polling. The only thing early polling didn’t predict is the huge bump Trump got from the indictments.

 

[BugI02]

A "charismatic" but lazy orange blowhard or a boring (and boringly effective) leader... INGO tells me the orange is much better.

Uhh, actually I think it was the millions of eligible republican voters who DIDN'T vote for Ron that told you that

The people telling the lies were the ones whispering in DeSantis' ear that it was his time

For somebody who says he like 'results', that was a 'result'

 

[SheepDog4Life]

Let me ask you this. Do you not think that other candidates such as DeSantis and Haley got into the race thinking that they could take advantage of the lawfare against Trump that I proposed? I surmise that if they did then they misread the Democrats intentions that you proposed.

No, I don't.... I think both of them figured 2020 was Trump's and 2024 was wide open as far back as 2019... and didn't bow to kiss his *** ring when he deigned to run again.

And also no, I don't think they misread... pretty sure when each indictment dropped they were like ******* ******* ************!

The bottom line for me is I'm sticking to the assertion I made several posts ago that other candidates such as DeSantis and Haley jumped into the race in part thinking that what the Democrats were doing would help their chances in the primary and it didn't materialize. In fact, it had the opposite effect of what they were hoping it would.

It's been my whole contention all along that I'm sticking with now from the original post of mine which you quoted that sparked this discussion. I think we are co-mingling different things here which is not to say that both can't be right at the same time. You appear to be talking about the Democrats intention while I'm talking about certain motivational factors for other candidates to enter into the race based on what the Democrats were doing to Trump.

I have no doubt that they were hoping it would increase their chances.

I'm not seeing it that way... I think both DeSantis and Haley planned on running in 2024 regardless. In fact, IIRC, Haley started laying the groundwork soon after she left the Trump administration, to the extent that she had to say she had zero intent on running in 2020.

Ditto with DeSantis, it was soooooo clear that Trump didn't endorse him for his re-election as governor in 2022.

Both of those are well before any indictment dropped... so I'm not seeing misguided opportunism.

I don’t think anyone knew that hitting Trump with lawfare would actually make him stronger.

I'd disagree... I know Andrew McCarthy at NR was preaching this well prior to the first indictment dropping... If Trump was in the news 24/7 for indictments dropping, it'd be 2016 all over again.

So, to pick nits, the "strategy" was to ensure Trump solidified his base and secured the nomination... if you point is that it did more than that, maybe in degree rather than nature of the effect.

I think, rather, it was always intended to prevent him from winning the general election, given that he would win the primaries. They did the polling. The only thing early polling didn’t predict is the huge bump Trump got from the indictments.

I think the "fly in the ointment" is that Biden has degraded more rapidly into decrepitude faster than "they" envisioned... but plan B was always someone other than Biden. I still think it will not be Biden v Trump in November, though it'll definitely be Trump as "our" nominee.

I guess we'll see... look for more things like Garland's publicizing Hurr's memo, the memo was required to the AG as to why criminal charges were not pursued... publicizing it was the Dem machine pressuring Biden to voluntarily withdraw. He'll "volunteer" or be "volunteered" with continuing pressure.

 

[SheepDog4Life]

Overton’s window explains this. Media, of course with some help from Trump himself, has successfully created a caricature of Trump that is loathsome to half the population. It’s possible to get away with the lawfare because people agree with the consequences. The same Overton’s window does not exist with the other challengers. Plus, there aren’t the same opportunities. DeSantis hasn’t developed high value Real Estate so there’s no opportunity to claim that he defrauded anyone.

So it’s an issue of perception, where people loath Trump and don’t care if the prosecution is legit (who wouldn’t want to see literally Hitler jailed) and it’s an issue of opportunity.

Actually, I think the overplayed lawfare endangers their objectives... $455M should strike any reasonable person as "excessive fines". That plays into Trump's hand as the "victim". No doubt many of the indictment are TDS... only Trump would face them.

But, not all...

We'll see if they focus on things that are obviously violations of his oath and criminal... his craven attempt to remain in power by stealing an election he did not win by pressuring Pence to declare him "re-elected" or his apparently criminal violations of federal court subpoenas for classified documents he retained and attempted to hide via a "shell game". The dude's off his rocker...

Look for those two to be the focus as attention turns to the general election.

 

[jamil]

Actually, I think the overplayed lawfare endangers their objectives... $455M should strike any reasonable person as "excessive fines". That plays into Trump's hand as the "victim". No doubt many of the indictment are TDS... only Trump would face them.

But, not all...

I do think that TPTB might have miscalculated in public opinion. Polls are showing Trump ahead of Biden despite all the lawfare. I think it's going to drive some Democrats over to Kennedy, if not Trump. I think Kennedy is going to take more votes from Biden than Trump, because at his heart, Kennedy is still a democrat in the ways legacy democrats want a candidate to be. He is a relief valve, as it were.

We'll see if they focus on things that are obviously violations of his oath and criminal... his craven attempt to remain in power by stealing an election he did not win by pressuring Pence to declare him "re-elected" or his apparently criminal violations of federal court subpoenas for classified documents he retained and attempted to hide via a "shell game". The dude's off his rocker...

Look for those two to be the focus as attention turns to the general election.

We're just gonna disagree that the "delegates" scheme is a crime. The constitution prevailed there, other than I do think many of Biden's votes were ill-gotten (changed election rules against the law) and exploiting mail-in voting. I don't know the number of ill-gotten votes, so it's impossible to know that the result would have been different.

The supposed violations of the subpoenas are a civil issue. Dude may be off his rocker. I'm not gonna dispute that. I don't see it as criminal. No one else would have been indicted for any of it. Trump himself wouldn't have had any of these proceedings if he were not running for POTUS, which means it's all for a purpose, which you seem to support.

 

[SheepDog4Life]

I do think that TPTB might have miscalculated in public opinion. Polls are showing Trump ahead of Biden despite all the lawfare.

IMO, that is more due to Biden rapid descent into decrepitude than a "rallying" around Trump. The polls I saw showed Trump ahead of Biden barely in excess of the polling margin of error. Anyone else versus Biden.... landslide margins.

To me, that's Biden's increasingly apparent dementia...

I think it's going to drive some Democrats over to Kennedy, if not Trump. I think Kennedy is going to take more votes from Biden than Trump, because at his heart, Kennedy is still a democrat in the ways legacy democrats want a candidate to be. He is a relief valve, as it were.

I'd agree with that... plus some hardcore conspiracy theory types. I haven't studied Kennedy in any depth, but on the surface, he's said bonkers stuff.

We're just gonna disagree that the "delegates" scheme is a crime. The constitution prevailed there, other than I do think many of Biden's votes were ill-gotten (changed election rules against the law) and exploiting mail-in voting. I don't know the number of ill-gotten votes, so it's impossible to know that the result would have been different.

If by "delegates" you're referring to the scheme to just through out state certified electors... I agree, I'm not a lawyer, but I don't know that there is any criminal statute that covers that.

To me, just plain violation of his oath to the Constitution and a craven attempt to cling to power against the country's unbroken record of peaceful transfers of power.

As I've noted before, to me, disqualifying... I'll never vote for the man again, not even for dog catcher.

Doesn't mean that was "criminal", but i'm not a lawyer.

The supposed violations of the subpoenas are a civil issue.

Obstructing a federal grand jury subpoena is not a civil issue... inducing his attorney's to lie to a federal court is not civil... colluding with others in a shell game to hide documents from that subpoena and federal court are not civil.

The arguments that he had "rights" to the documents a la "Socks" is superfluous, IMO. First, not personal records and second, and more importantly, he never argued that in court... just claimed it after the search warrant showed he had lied and obstructed the subpoena.

IANAL, but everything about that screams criminal.

Dude may be off his rocker. I'm not gonna dispute that. I don't see it as criminal. No one else would have been indicted for any of it. Trump himself wouldn't have had any of these proceedings if he were not running for POTUS, which means it's all for a purpose, which you seem to support.

No one else would have held onto the documents, lied, and colluded with others to obstruct the courts... well, as Trump himself complained, why didn't someone just shred them for him and make them disappear?

If you're gonna criminal, you'd better have henchmen that have your back with BleachBit and shredders... like Hillary.

Just stoopid!

 

[jamil]

IMO, that is more due to Biden rapid descent into decrepitude than a "rallying" around Trump. The polls I saw showed Trump ahead of Biden barely in excess of the polling margin of error. Anyone else versus Biden.... landslide margins.

To me, that's Biden's increasingly apparent dementia...

It's obviously multi-factor. But people do see the unfairness of the prosecutions. It's another nail in Biden's coffin. The abuse of power is staggering.

I'd agree with that... plus some hardcore conspiracy theory types. I haven't studied Kennedy in any depth, but on the surface, he's said bonkers stuff.


If by "delegates" you're referring to the scheme to just through out state certified electors... I agree, I'm not a lawyer, but I don't know that there is any criminal statute that covers that.

To me, just plain violation of his oath to the Constitution and a craven attempt to cling to power against the country's unbroken record of peaceful transfers of power.

As I've noted before, to me, disqualifying... I'll never vote for the man again, not even for dog catcher.

Doesn't mean that was "criminal", but i'm not a lawyer.

Yes, I'm referring to the whole scheme. The delegates were supposed to trigger Pence declaring Trump the winner.

Obstructing a federal grand jury subpoena is not a civil issue... inducing his attorney's to lie to a federal court is not civil... colluding with others in a shell game to hide documents from that subpoena and federal court are not civil.

The arguments that he had "rights" to the documents a la "Socks" is superfluous, IMO. First, not personal records and second, and more importantly, he never argued that in court... just claimed it after the search warrant showed he had lied and obstructed the subpoena.

IANAL, but everything about that screams criminal.

These are all allegations. If courts rule that Trump has a right to those documents, it's pretty much over. Not that they will. But it has to play out. If it turns out he did commit a crime, it has to be obvious enough to honest people. TDS'ers likely cannot accept a truth that does not make Trump literally Hitler.

No one else would have held onto the documents, lied, and colluded with others to obstruct the courts... well, as Trump himself complained, why didn't someone just shred them for him and make them disappear?

If you're gonna criminal, you'd better have henchmen that have your back with BleachBit and shredders... like Hillary.

If he did. We've only heard one side of it.

Just stoopid!

No argument there.

 

[Ingomike]

To me, just plain violation of his oath to the Constitution and a craven attempt to cling to power against the country's unbroken record of peaceful transfers of power.

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

While you are certainly free to believe what you wish, there are three co-equal branches, the President has the autonomous power to execute the oath as he sees fit and if congress wants to second guess that they can impeach, which they did and failed to convict.

 

[Ingomike]

No one else would have held onto the documents, lied, and colluded with others to obstruct the courts... well, as Trump himself complained, why didn't someone just shred them for him and make them disappear?

If you're gonna criminal, you'd better have henchmen that have your back with BleachBit and shredders... like Hillary.

Just stoopid!

Who does the constitution vest the final power over documents? It isn’t the courts. It isn’t the DOJ or FBI. Who is it?

 

[KG1]

Who does the constitution vest the final power over documents? It isn’t the courts. It isn’t the DOJ or FBI. Who is it?

If this is true than there cannot be an obstruction case for not handing them over even under subpoena.