“Call me Letitia . . . 'tis the orange whale I seek . . .”

Letitia James, the NY State Attorney General, must be soooo cheesed. She's been trying – for years – to force Trump into a courtroom. And now the captain of another ship – Alvin Bragg, Manhattan's district attorney – is closing in with HIS harpoon for the kill, instead.

Did anyone see Trump on TV this week? More orange than he's ever been. Couldn't possibly be from a weekend on the golf course. Has to be some sort chemical thing. Jack-o-Trumpkin. In any case, Trump surfaced briefly to announce that if he IS harpooned – er, charged – he intends to surrender voluntarily to the DA.

This of course is causing consternation among democrat mariners manning other whaleboats. They've been chasing Moby Trump for so long, they fear they won't be taken seriously unless their quarry is shown in handcuffs. But how to achieve this, if Trump is going to surrender himself?

Ironically, appearing in handcuffs is probably what Trump yearns for as well. To energize his base, which is dispirited and in disarray. The outrage! Our hero the president in handcuffs!! For the crime of . . .

“Lying about cash given to a porn star” ????

WTH!!! Is that what Alvin Bragg, district attorney, is charging Trump with? Adultery money? Geesuz. After years and years of yammering about everything from Russian collusion, to “emoluments”, to inflated real estate valuations, to mishandled top secret docs, to the January 6th violence? It's going to be hooker cash that gets him?

JFK and RFK are probably glad they're not around to see this. And at least a half dozen of their “known companions”, from actress/nude pinup Marilyn Monroe to mob moll Judith Exner. That was a different era, of course. The press – when they reported on this sort of thing at all – did so with a wink and a smile. “Lookit our boy go!!”

Back to Trump. And Bragg and Letitia James. And whoever else is leaking 24/7 to the press that they ALSO have indictments imminent. Or possibly sometime in the NEXT 3 years.

I'm convinced Trump belongs in a courtroom. But probably not for canoodling with an adult film "actress". What about REAL CRIMES? There should have been plenty of evidence in Trump's communications with Georgia officials. About his intent to interfere with the election results. There might even be some sort of evidence for tax fraud. If prosecutors can ever figure out how to make the case that Trump understands what his accountants put in 5,000 pages of income tax forms. Reality check: you and I don't even think of filing a Turbo Tax return without “the audit support” feature, do we? It means we can't be held liable for criminal deception. Just for additional tax due, if any.

Here's my March Madness wish for all involved:

[b]Trump[/b] – turn yourself in, if actually charged. Don't act out, and bait someone into cuffing you.

[b]DA Bragg [/b]– Bring this thing to trial quickly. Arraign the accused and witnesses via Zoom. No perp walks needed - you're not running for any higher office. And even if he pleads guilty or you win a jury verdict, Trump is NOT going to jail for slipping a few bucks to Stormy Daniels. She probably needs the money anyway – porn careers don't have legs, or come with match 401K retirement plans.

[b]Attorney General Letitia Jame[/b]s – Okay. We get it. You're running for governor. But you know, the longer you drag this out - without convincing ANY judge to agree on an indictment - the more pathetic you look. Pass this thing off to a special prosecutor and get back to work on stuff like: drug cartels, drive by shootings, human trafficking, and slumlords. That's what New York voters are going to ask about. Not “got Trump?”

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

LeopoldBloom · M

It's possible that James and Garland were waiting for someone else to go first. After Bragg pops the presidential prosecution cherry, the others will be confident enough to follow. And don't dismiss Bragg's case as inconsequential. Michael Cohen went to prison for the same crime. It's not a crime to pay off a goomah to keep her quiet. The crime is campaign finance fraud. Trump's defense will be that keeping Daniels quiet was important for his campaign, so it was a valid expense. Bragg's argument will be that he should have reported it in that case.

SusanInFlorida · 31-35, F

@LeopoldBloom Letitia doesn't answer to the president. Garland does. If he's sitting on his hands deliberately, does that mean its on orders from the White House? In other words, the entire prosecution is politically motivated?

LeopoldBloom · M

@SusanInFlorida It's more likely that Garland is being overly cautious. That being said, his case is by far the hardest one. Bragg's is a slam-dunk; Michael Cohen already served time for the same crime, so it's just a matter of building the case against Trump. James' case is civil so not on the same timeline. Willis' case in Georgia is more complex than Bragg's as it involves more players and the fake electors along with Trump's phone call to Raffensperger. The Georgia legislature is considering a law that would allow her to be removed, so she may be working on passing the case off to the DOJ, which would also allow her to go back to focusing on other crimes.

Garland's job is the hardest of all, where he has to link Trump's actions directly to Jan. 6. It may not be possible. If I tell my neighbor that the mailman is banging his wife while he's at work, and he shoots the mailman the next day, I bear some responsibility for that, but unless I conspired with him to plan the shooting, I'm not legally responsible. If Trump or his minions conspired with the Proud Boys or other groups, then he has exposure, but cases like that can take years to put together.

Garland could have already charged Trump over the stolen documents. It's possible Biden told him not to, or Garland wants to bring all charges at the same time. Also, the DOJ under one president charging the prior president does look overtly political. Biden may not want to set a precedent where presidents routinely charge their predecessors in a tit-for-tat.

SusanInFlorida · 31-35, F

@LeopoldBloom i've seen at least 2 television "talk panels" that disagree with your "bragg slam dunk" theory. the participants feel that "impartial jurors" are going to laugh at a case which hinges on how hooker money was classified and paid.

here's a quote: "Has this ever been brought before a judge? Won't the defense team score major points if the point out that the first and only instance in history is Trump?"

LeopoldBloom · M

@SusanInFlorida Yeah, it looks like I fell for the media frenzy and Trump's own promotion of his "impending arrest." It's more likely that the first indictment will be from Fani Willis. While Michael Cohen went to prison for basically the same crime, Trump's argument will be that his goal was to hide the affair from his wife, and that he was unaware of the financial shenanigans, and besides, Cohen is a convicted felon, how is he even credible?

SusanInFlorida · 31-35, F

@LeopoldBloom the big enchilada is the georgia election interference. i can't understand why that hasn't been charged. the evidence is clear cut.

however, we WERE treated to clever AI generated fake Trump "arrest photos" yesterday, in lieu of any actual legal action.

LeopoldBloom · M

@SusanInFlorida I don't know what the delay is, unless Willis is trying to turn it over to the DOJ so she can get back to prosecuting other crimes instead of getting tied up in a major case like this for the next year. She is being criticized for that.

SusanInFlorida · 31-35, F

@LeopoldBloom Fani Willis is an employee of the State of Georgia. District Attorney of Fulton Country. She can investigate all the Georgia crimes she wants, but I don't believe she has any authority to "turn them over" to the Department of Justice.

If georgia laws were broken, she should indict. If not, close the investigation.

If federal laws were broken, the DOJ has an obligation to investigate on their own, and not hide behind some "Fulton County" local prosecutor waiting to see what happens next.

LeopoldBloom · M

@SusanInFlorida Isn't election interference also a federal crime? We don't know if Jack Smith is also looking at it.

SusanInFlorida · 31-35, F

@LeopoldBloom it seems like it out to be. on another site i was "schooled" that it's exclusively a georgia legal questions. which seems unlikely - why would georgia have the final say in a federal election?

on the other hand, states apparently DO have the final say on voter ID, polling hours, and whether or not the dead can vote.

LeopoldBloom · M

@SusanInFlorida The states decide which slate of electors they will send to Congress.

SusanInFlorida · 31-35, F

@LeopoldBloom this is the "argument" which direct/popular election of the president like to discuss. the "faithless elector". Some appointed nutjob who fails to carry out his responsibility under the law.

it's never happened, but it could.

I'm more intrigued by the idea of a "sitting governor" in one party appointing a replacement for an "incapacitated/deceased senator" from the opposing party. THAT one has extraordinary opportunity for political mischief. Especially in a senate which is almost perfectly split between the two parties.

LeopoldBloom · M

@SusanInFlorida There have been a few faithless electors in recent elections, but it's mainly been performative. The penalty where there is one is usually just a fine, so there is a risk that a rich bastard could assure enough of them that he would pay their fines or legal fees if they vote the way he wants.

The entire system is a holdover from the days when the public had no way of knowing who the candidates were, so their state legislators picked some guys to represent the state's interests in Washington and choose the right person for the presidency.

SusanInFlorida · 31-35, F

@LeopoldBloom i think if "faithless electors" and fraud voting facilitators had mandatory jail terms, it would completely eliminate it.

LeopoldBloom · M

@SusanInFlorida I don't think we should have electors at all. It's not 1820 FFS. Just change to a direct national popular vote.