Just buffoonery, or something worse?

When was Hunter Biden President?

 

Trump is beating DeSantis bigly in the polls.

 

Malicious prosecution and abuse of process are generally civil issues. Prosecutors are rarely held accountable for their behavior. Bragg is making a strong case for his disbarment and termination though.

 

Yep. If they have evidence of a crime, enough to indict, they have to either wait until he leaves office or go to Congress with a referral for impeachment and removal.

 

That is what impeachment and removal is for. If a prosecutor has a case he takes it to the Congress for impeachment and removal so he can be prosecuted or else waits until he leaves office.

 

And he stated his position on that. I know you disagree with his position, but it is what it is.

 

The Constitution would have still been in place even if the prevailing opinion had been that yes the ECA allowed for the rejection or electors. That is what lawyers do you know, plot legal strategies many of which test the interpretation of the law, they challenge the law and those interpretations they tell their clients which might have a change which may not. Eastman's were the radical ideas and they were ultimately rejected on the basis they would not stand up to Constitutional muster. The did nothing illegal. You keep ignoring it was based on previous challenges to electors by DEMOCRATS.

 

Who did?

 

The tactics that Trump was pursuing would have violated the Constitution and the ECA. Please read.

 

At what point does vindictiveness substitute for justice?

 

Yet if you look here DeSantis is the only on either side to have a positive favorable rating at all.

 

Well, then, is it more important that Trump get the nomination than the GOP win? (I'm not assuming anything about whether or not you think he can win.)

There were people in 1992 who supported Perot because the principles involved were to them more important than putting a Republican in the White House. Likewise, anti-war Democrats in 1972 insisted the nominee be anti-war even if it cost Democrats the election--and it did. Custer did almost as well at Little Big Horn.

I'm getting a sense there are a number of Republicans who would rather hold on to control of the party and chance not winning that go for a more moderate candidate.

Me? I don't like Trump and won't support him. I don't care for Old Joe, either, but see him as the lesser evil. I won't support Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren, either. Trump vs. Warren? I can always take the day to play golf.

 

Yes, and I'll betcha some of DeSantis' negatives, particularly of late, are a slight shift against him by MAGA types who view DeSantis as a spoiler. It would be interesting to see how DeSantis would do against Old Joe if Trump bowed out. Likewise, how would Trump do against a moderate white Democrat who isn't Joe Biden.

 

Patrick Reed is disliked by his fellow pros who say he cheats.

 

He was actually President, not Donald Trump.

 

I didn't know that. I would think if they had proof, he would be disqualified.

 

So the plan never happened? We agree.

 

Yes, because Pence resisted the pressure from Trump. What you need to learn, and never will, is that the plan existed and that Trump pushed for it and that it only failed because Pence resisted Trump's demands for criminal activity.

 

Getting back to the subject at hand........

Senate Republicans cool on House plans to question Manhattan DA

House Republicans want to question Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg about his potential indictment of former President Trump — but Senate Republicans aren't so hot on the idea.

Why it matters: The move by House Republicans — perhaps their boldest effort yet to protect Trump — is drawing mixed reactions from their colleagues in the Senate, many of whom see serious risks in second-guessing how local prosecutors pursue cases.

• Bragg has made clear that's how he sees it: "We will not be intimidated by attempts to undermine the judicial process," he said in a statement.
• But even if the summons doesn't result in Bragg appearing before House members, the GOP's request could open the door to future Congresses using their considerable investigative powers to try to influence local prosecutorial decisions.

What they're saying: "I personally prefer to see them work on the agenda they ran on and that got them the majority" in the House, Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) told Axios.
https://www.axios.com/2023/03/22/senate-republicans-manhattan-da-bragg

 

Now, that part of it, I don't know about.

 

Like George McGovern? Win the nomination, but lose in November?

 

I don’t know nor do you know this.

 

Ya know what I see in this article that clearly labels it as biased? ". . . perhaps their boldest effort yet to protect Trump." Their effort couldn't possibly be about our judicial system being fair and nonpolitical. Colorful language, like this, makes it easy to just dismiss the article as junk.

 

As opposed to the tried and true wet noodle Republican candidate.

 

I said as much. My question to you was about what you value more--the nomination or winning in the general election.