Why is it taking so much time to bring Trump to court?

[David Horn]

(10-15-2022, 07:31 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(10-14-2022, 11:59 PM)JasonBlack Wrote:

(10-13-2022, 07:41 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: I would never endorse a trial of an ex-President for specious or trivial offenses. Everybody does something wrong on occasion. I expect every politician to lie and cheat if necessary to get re-elected, and those who do the least of that are veritable saints. By some standards the killings of Qusay and Uday Hussein, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, Osama bin Laden, or Ayman al-Zawahiri are extrajudicial killings. I excuse all five killings and I would accept any other country doing exactly the same under the same circumstances without fault of the national entity.

Perhaps the title of the OP was meant to be rhetorical, but I responding directly to "why is it taking so much" rather than focusing on Trump. Put simply, a lot of people are apprehensive about this because where to draw that line between trivial vs non-trivial is hard to determine and subject to partisan slant. Even if he deserves it...we're setting a dangerous precedent, and we've all seen how quickly snowballs slide down a slippery slope during a 4T.

And yet the progressive faction generally comes out ahead in a crisis, the crisis problems have to be solved for the crisis to end, and during the crisis end 'never again' phase the solution found is added to the American values.  Trump and to an extent Nixon represent a crisis problem.  The culture, as a result of crisis, is modified to accept the standards and values of whatever was necessary to solve the crisis problems. Often the standards of previous crises are refined.  Principles like equality (BLM), freedom (choice) and rule of law (Trump) are expanded.

So, yes, I would expect a careful line to be drawn somewhere between establishing no one being above the law and partisan retaliation.  The drawing of this line is already in progress, with the extreme ends already being identified.  Perhaps more is needed, but it is perhaps best to leave it somewhat open.

In an effort to be an all-offending responder, i'll disagee with both of you ... to some extent, at least.

Starting with Jason: no, the pace of prosecution is not stick-in-the-mud slow due to waveriing and eye-rollling.  It's slow because prosecutions -- especially at this level -- need to be air tight, and that's not a trivial task.  Is our criminal justice system so broken that even cases so obvious in nature require years to prepare?  Yes.  On the other hand, allmost all convictions overturned can never be revisited.  And good luch changing a system that benefits the practionsers who also set the rules.

Now to Bob: I can't say 1Ts always resolve the issues of the cirsis.  Reconstruction after the ACW lead in a short loop right back to where it all started.  It took the next crsis to trigger anything approaching reform, and that's, once again, under heavy attack.  Some things are baked-in too deep to be that easily resolved.  I'm not sure how autocratic the tendancy of the US really is, but ~40% seem ready to back the current nominal dictator they love so well.  Is this different from the German-American Bund in the '30s, the John Birch Society in the '50s, the Branch Davidians in the '90s and the QAnon wacknuts of today.