The judges are not required to dismiss the cases simply because the government wants them dropped. It just seems to me that the court might have a problem dropping a case based solely on the job title a suspect obtained after the case was filed. Trump entered this campaign in an attempt to avoid being sent to prison.

Trump has said if he is elected, he will fire Jack Smith as soon as possible, but the judge would have to agree to take Smith off the docket for that to happen. When has a defendant ever gotten to choose who they wanted to prosecute the case against them? I do not believe Trump will avoid being held accountable for his actions.

Exactly! Besides, we already know what a Trump judicial proceeding is like. The Defendant sleeps through the majority of the trial, and his woefully inadequate lawyers wake him up when the verdict is delivered where he loses.

America can handle it. :)

What's more hysterical is a prattling dipshit claiming repeatedly to know what everyone else "sincerely believes." Now that's what I call a retread. Oops, my "e" is sticking, I meant to type: Moldy ass troll with man boobs and an irrefutable intellectual disability.

Ya'all have access to all the same facts that I have access to..

And I guess it never occurred to the self-proclaimed mind-reading mental midget's withering brain cell that some of us have access to something that he doesn't even know exists, and that makes the troll a demonstrable moron. Oops, I meant "more on"... dang that sticking "e" key.

Ya'all have access to all the same facts that I have access to..

And there is not a single solitary fact or set of facts that would indicate Headboard Harris and NO BALLZ Walz can actually WIN this election..

Ahhh well.. We only have to wait 12 more days and the reality will set in for ya'all..

The reality of 4 more years of President Trump... :D

And then the REAL Weigantian Party begins!!! :D

As for right now?? Time to hit the streets of Duval County and make those streets safe for Democracy... :D

See ya in a couple days.. :D

Samuel Tilden supporters sent slates of fake electors for states he'd lost to Rutherford B Hayes, essentially the same thing John Eastman tried and failed to do on behalf of Donald Trump.

Well, I wouldn't agree it was "essentially the same thing" and certainly not with the intent to defraud "after the fact" because Tilden had actually won the popular vote by about 250,000 -- a massive amount way back in 1876 -- and was also ahead in the Electoral College count; however, there was rampant voter suppression in the South where Blacks were being denied the right to vote through intimidation (up to and including murder). Long story short, there were still a few Southern states with Republican governors and "returning boards" that would determine the official electoral votes in those Southern states, determining which votes to count and which to throw out if deemed fraudulent. The Republican returning boards in all three states argued that fraud, intimidation, and violence in certain districts invalidated votes, and they threw out enough Democratic votes for Hayes (R) to win, and then all three of the Republican returning boards awarded their states' electoral votes to Hayes: South Carolina, Louisiana, and Florida (where Tilden had initially won the popular vote albeit through Black voter suppression) and each side also submitting sets of election returns to DC with different results.

Fast forward again to the "Compromise of 1877" and the bargain among Democrats and Republicans in DC to end Reconstruction in the South with the compromise of Hayes.

However, did a President Tilden retain lawyers like Chesebro, Eastman, Giuliani etc. to interfere in an election he knowingly lost (after multiple lawsuits and multiple recounts) by leading a national conspiracy and the president himself personally attempting to cajole his own vice president to act on his behalf and encouraging a mob to descend on the Capitol in order to assist in his interference of the constitutionally mandated work of Congress so that he could remain in office by fraudulent means when he was well aware he lost a presidential election?

No... because despite Tilden winning the popular vote in 1876, there was never a POTUS Tilden and hence no reason to discuss the myriad reasons whether or not that president should be federally prosecuted or pardoned.

The Chesebro memo:
https://int.nyt.com/data/documenttools/chesebro-dec-6-memo/ce55d6abd79c2c71/full.pdf

that did in fact happen, in 1876 i think.

Define "that" which you "think" happened, and I'll definitely follow up. :)

America is resilient; we've lived through it so far, why would we suddenly grow unable to stand the "pain" inflicted upon us so far?

Does anyone seriously believe the DOJ should punish those persons who committed acts of physical criminal violence at the Capitol while ignoring the plethora of crime committed in conspiracy that led Americans to commit those crimes?

We punish crime in America to deter future criminals; we should definitely be punishing presidents to deter future criminal presidents.

Or are we pathetically incapable of learning the lessons of history?

No pardon. No way.

Nice article, CW. :)

America has also never had the experience of a president who retained top secret documents at his public resort and when asked to return the stolen property returned some while intentionally hiding the others from his own attorneys in further violation of law and who conspired to stay in office by leading a conspiracy of persons from multiple states to submit fraudulent documents in the form of fake certificates of ascertainment to the National Archives and repeatedly cajoling his own vice president to unilaterally recognize the illegal fraudulent certificates and therefore disenfranchise the millions of voters of those multiple states and then encourage a mob to help him interfere in the constitutionally mandated work of Congress in order to fraudulently keep himself in the office of the presidency when he was well aware he lost an election.

I could go on.

I don't think Hunter Biden would accept a pardon from Trump.

You must mean for federal crimes and if she is elected to an office where she has the legal power to pardon someone/anyone.

Answer: Hell no.

Oops, my bad. My fingers must have slipped. I meant to say: Fuck no.

Now I'll read the article and give you a chance to change my mind.