" Well, they say they are going to follow the rule of the office of legal counsel that says the president cannot be indicted. I don’t agree with that conclusion. I didn’t agree with the decision not to indict Richard Nixon. We did issue a report which was given to the House in order to have them have a roadmap for impeachment. The difference between then and now is that this House will do nothing with it. They will ignore any roadmap. They are ignoring the evidence that is in their face. Right now, it is obstruction in plain sight. It’s been obstruction in plain sight since the very, very beginning. So it’s got to happen that something will be done. I think there will be a blue wave in November and the House will treat it differently."

gratuitous

(82,849 posts)

4. Just remember: The prosecution gets ONE shot

Reply to triron (Original post)

Tue Jul 31, 2018, 03:42 PM

Jul 2018

Screw it up, and the target goes scot-free. This is one of those occasions when a substantial portion of the proceedings will play out in the court of public opinion. Fox will be blasting coast-to-coast 24-7 with rationalizations, denials, character attacks, and everything else the assembled brain trust there can think of to protect Trump and deflect allegations.

Bringing criminal charges against a sitting president is a hard enough task just for starters. To sustain a prosecution is going to require a lot of spadework in fixing public opinion to accept the notion of a criminal indictment. On that front, we're closer today than we were yesterday, and a lot farther along than we were at the beginning of the year. But there is still much to be done. Yeah, we all want Trump gone yesterday, but it's not going to happen as quickly as we want. Convict Manafort first. Lay the foundation for building a case against Trump in the public mind.

Oh, and don't forget the midterms in 98 days (14 weeks).

Reply to this discussion