74% of Republicans think that Trump as a dictator would be good for America,

I kinda feel these people wouldn't care if Trump was President until he died.

They live in their bubble and just want closed borders, access to their guns, and a leader who talks smack.

Not sure how this works out for the GOP - especially in public.

In the report, it clearly points out the differences between the Biden case and the Trump case. That's a minus for Trump. The Dems aren't going to let that slide by and will make Hur go on record repeatedly.

Sure they'll get some digs at Biden's memory and such but cats already out of the bag there - so I don't see much gain.

Such a ban would force pregnant women to carry their fetuses to term after 16 weeks, even in states that have no restrictions on abortions. States that currently outright prohibit abortion would still be allowed to do so.

Sounds like to something that would totally sink him come November.......

I don't believe this is something he'll want to talk about.

But in this picture, they make him just look creepy

If you think that qualifies as creepy - and of course it's a JOKE - you're just not getting it.

Sometimes the hate is so much............

Not sure why Haley doesn't come back with the perfect counterpunch:

"My husband is off doing what you never had the guts to do."

She needs to hit back hard.

His approval rating is at 37%. That simply doesn't happen to a president who has such an impressive record of accomplishments as you assert

Funny thing is, this could be Trump or Biden.

....and I hate to go there, Gal....but there are many other ways to convey a report.

"feeble minded"

"ederly"

Sounds like Hur did his job, but still decided to get a his digs in.

It's like when the appeals court wrote the decision on Trump immunity. They could have come down hard and mocked the Trump lawyer's assertions. But they didn't. They stayed professional.

Let's face it, both guys are old and that's why a majority of people want candidates not named Biden and Trump.

I find it interesting that the Special Counsel felt he had to present a defense case for Biden in the report. Very odd.

Shortage of evidence seemed enough, but he then took it to another level. I don't want to point fingers, but Hur is Republican.

Seems like a cheap shot to me.

He can still be adjudicated to be not qualified be President after the election because he engaged in an insurrection.

Yeah, but who is going to execute that? Congress? LOL Good luck /w that.

Isn't it a distinction without a difference?

I think so, but ask the Textualists.......

Gal - technically that's not "insurection".

But I wonder, in the future, if those charges could be used in the 14th Amendment - by Congress or whoever would execute it.

Surely not a good look for Biden.

But the facts still stand that if you cooperate - particuarly if you're a President - you're doing yourself a favor.

Trump did himself no favors - to this day has not sat down with DOJ - and still believes he's in the right.

That's a big difference.

Besides that's not how the law works. You don't get to just give classified docs back and say "oopsie, I took these but I'm giving them back so I get off unscathed"

Uhhh, yeah it is. Especially for Presidents. Contrary to popular belief, former Presidents get a ton of leeway.

Trump, of course, takes it to the ulimate extreme. Again, DESTROYS NORMS.

He refused to give back the documents, and doubled down that he was allowed to have them. WTF?

He's getting what he deserves.

If their aim wasn't to bury Trump, why haven't they charged Biden with the classified documents found everywhere from a university to his garage going back to his VP days?

Again, how was it handled by Biden versus Trump?

Biden cooperated, fully.

Trump gave you every reason not to cooperate (and all were wrong).

See the difference?

After the 2016 election Democrats pressured electors to change their vote in order to change the outcome of the election. By current standards that would be participating in an insurrection.

I believe there has to be context here. Where and at what level? Additionally, it never had traction. And of course there is this little goody:

You can't get a conviction on a charge like that without clear proof and the prosecutors know this - which is why it went the way it did.

This is debatable, but there are a few reasons they did not go that way.

First, it keeps DOJ apolitical, because if convicted, that would disqualify him from holding office.

Second, that charge has not happened for over 100 years - meaning yes it would be a hard get. They went for more favorable charges and that's exactly what good prosecutors do.

The DOJ is not looking to bury Trump politically as you might think. They just want him to have his comeuppance for what he actually did, whether that's J6 or the documents case.

No one tied to J6 has been charged with or convicted of insurrection... Including Trump.

True statement, and while insurrection did not come up a lot today in the court, to me it's a major sticking point that helps Trump's case.

In fact, in the J6 case, he's hasn't been charged that.

Careful, you aren't allowed to do that here.

Sure I am........

See the issue is Trump has broken all norms.

So we actually have to debate WTF he did from Nov 3 thru J6..............

This is a tough one, but I think Chuck Rosenthal on MSNBC summed it up best, and I'll paraphrase:

"In law school, I would read an assigned case. I would read the majority opinion and think they got it right. Then I'd read the dissenting opinion and think they got it right".

LOL, that's where I am. I see both sides.

SC is really trying to take the easiest path.

But what does this all tell us? The man should have been impeached the second time around.

Congress could have had the truth if they authorized an Indpendent Counsel investigation, but they didn't because they did not want the truth.

And, if I am not mistaken, same thing for J6.

What's the common theme?

It means don't trust republicans - the party that lied us into a foreign war and is now lying us into a civil war.

+1

Speaking of Trump collusion:

,a reelected ------- (the sexual predator and fraud) with Rudy Colludi as his AG WON'T pursue charges against Clinton, Obama and Biden?

No, he could. But it would look foolish and fail before it got started.

This is the issue with Trump. He doesn't respect norms. And that's how he's gotten himself into this pickle in the first place.

That does open Presidents to criminal charges, even for "official" acts.

No it doesn't.

Any entity could bring a case against Obama if they wanted to. In fact, the Bush admin was sued for Iraq (and dismissed).

The law would be interpreted on a case by case basis accordingly. Is there immunity? Of course, but not blanket.

Nothing has really changed.

The courts are ruling what every common sense person knew already- a President is not immune from criminal activity.

If a President embezzles money - he'd hopefully be impeached and then criminally charged. True today, true yesterday.

That effectively leaves a target on every President's back

And we haven't had a problem in nearly 250 years.

Until now.