Liberty Tree

Democrats are realizing that the chances of President Trump being charged with a federal crime are decreasing rapidly. Therefore, they will achieve it at the state level. The plan will be to get a highly partisan Democrat DA, probably in New York, to impanel a "special Grand Jury" By special I mean hand picked to ensure an indictment. Now, all must be sure to understand that the Democrats are really concerned about the rule of law, the people's right to know or guilt or innocence. We have been shown multiple times that the practice guilt by accusation. The Democrats believe that just by obtaining an indictment they can get Trump, which is their goal. They are totally driven by h**e and nothing else. I will give two examples where they have done this before. Then Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson had charges brought against her by a partisan Democrat DA in hopes of driving her from office. It did not work and the case was so weak that when it came time for the trial he had to admit he had nothing and did not even present a case. The judge ordered the jury to give a directed verdict of not guilty. Democrats used the same tactic on Tom Delay and were able to get a conviction in a highly Democrat district. However, both the district appeals court and the state Supreme Court ruled there was insufficient evidence to show he had committed any crime and overturned his conviction. The Democrats did not care because they had achieved their goal of getting him out of office. The only thing I am not sure of is the timing of the Democrats' move to indict Trump. They may do it soon and call for him to resign, which he is unlikely to do and it will lead to a long legal battle. My best guess is that they may wait until the 2020 e******n and use it as an "October Surprise" so he has no time to defend himself. Remember, the Democrats goal is to get Trump and the end justifies the means with t***h, fairness, the law or anything else not standing in their way.

Michael Rich Loc: Lapine Oregon

Yes you are spot on the trail.

The evil tactics are how Muellers team works.

Andrew Weissmann is a perfect example of a crooked prosecutor that's why he leads the Mueller team.

He prosecuted the Enron case and some of the convictions were thrown out because hiding evidence.

Weissmann and Meller both are professional framers and that the type of State level scum are who will be going after the President.

bylm1-Bernie

Interesting analysis, LT. It will be interesting to see if it materializes. Based on previous action by Democrats, I would concur that it sounds pretty much on target. We know that the Dems will stop at nothing, so the the end goal is pretty solid. The question is, are they dumb enough to try to upset a perfectly legal P**********l e******n with the kind of skullduggery that they used to elect Senator Al Franken and, previously, the guy in Washington State. I haven't seen anything in the last 2 years to make me doubt it. One thing for sure, you won't read about it in the MSM until they are forced to let us know.

Sew_What

It will work as good as all of the Republican Committees that failed, that's my guess.

bylm1-Bernie

Yeah, mostly because of Trey Gowdy's requests for information being stonewalled by deep state.

Kevyn

Al Capone had his hands in a multitude of crimes from bootlegging to murders and what he eventually was convicted of was tax evasion. Few people think that tax evasion was his only crime. It will likely be the same for the I***t Pumpkinfuhrer. While ironclad evidence that he conspired with a forign adversary against our nation is obvious it may be difficult to prove beyond reasonable doubt in court unless his family members turn states evidence against him. We may need to settle with tax evasion, fraud, receiving bribes or suborning perjury and obstruction of justice. All are serious crimes and any will do as long as he is held accountable and brought to justice.

Liberty Tree

The rule of law is that you first have a crime and then look for the one who did it. The Democrat way is you have one you want to get and then search for a crime to pin on him. If you cannot find one then you create one or just accuse without proof.

old marine Loc: America home of the brave

The only fly in the ointment is the State has no jurisdiction of the President while he is in office as President.

Only state crimes after he leaves office can be tried. It is just another example of Socialist Dim-O-Crats and misdirections of their own crimes.

🇺🇸 God bless America and President Trump.

old marine Loc: America home of the brave

I totally agree. The Socialist Dim-O-Crats agenda is to protect their own by false information on the one stopping their agenda.

proud republican Loc: RED CALIFORNIA

You are so right.....

Liberty Tree

That is one reason I think they will use it as an October surprise just before the e******n to sway public pinion.

Gatsby

I think that you nailed it old marine:

If the issue before the SCOTUS is, can a state court indict a sitting U.S. President,

then the state is going to lose.

permafrost Loc: Minnesota

LOL HA HA HA,,,,,

You can toss out that BS after all the years and money spent on trying to find anything at all that Lady Hillary could be guilty of and coming up empty.. even after Gowdy tried to manufacture evidence?

Gowdy was the one who should have been locked up..

As it was, the republicans, including Gowdy had to admit nothing was found to show Hillary was guilty of anything..

so another 100 million down the pipe fo r nothing at all..

woodguru

Back it up to the heart of this, how about when Trump actually did the crimes he's being charged with and the evidence happens to be there because he did?

You get so caught up in the outrage of these prosecutors making things up you stop looking at whether Trump did the things or not. Actually it's pretty obvious he did but your rhetorical narrative has started with the premise his crimes were no worse than Hillary or Obama's, thereby leading to the realm of evidence being made up when it wasn't. Charges are in cold harsh black and white, the crime is listed by statute, and the charge is outlined with relevant proof. The Hillary did it too, or Obama did worse defense will not play in a court of law.

The way Trump did and does business is and was dirty, he is an easy target. I think we all know Trump heavily misused nonprofit foundation funds, we've already seen documentation that proves he spent funds on personal things, but you think that Hillary did too so it's irrelevant...newsflash, it's not irrelevant.

Misusing campaign or inauguration funds is not irrelevant either. Money laundering is not irrelevant, imoluments is not irrelevant, Kushner extorting hundreds of millions (billions) from Qatar is relevant. The difference between Obama and Trump is that Trump left evidence all over the place. The FBI doesn't have to make it up.

Sew_What

The Deep State is a myth. Ever heard of politics?