Well, that and all the other very real and serious crime's Trump has committed.
However, yes, there is an element of truth in that. Trump got away with all sorts of crimes because he didn't rock the boat and he targeted the right people. When he got too big for his boots and started making a mess for other people that matter (not by trying to reduce their crimes or anything, mind, just making things worse for everyone including the people you are supposed to leave alone), he crossed a line.
Your timeline works, I think, if you see how the media and Hillary Clinton championed Trump and got him to win the primary, and then he started pushing the "Hillary for Prison" stuff, crossing the wrong (her) people. But once in office, hell, before then, the metaphorical police were already following him in traffic. He had spoken critically of our involvement in NATO. China was transgressing us. There appeared to be nothing in it for the American people to be engaged in forever wars (he wanted to know why we weren't getting cheap or even free oil for our services in the mid-east. Which is a vulgar and wrong way to look at the duties of the POTUS when using our military.) Don't recall if he started calling it fake news during the campaign or not, but that was surely a no-no.
The problem is that Trump was president after the fact, so that's why it didn't happen back then and that's why he wasn't charged at the federal level. Now if you think a president should be above the law, that's your opinion, but I think quite the opposite. As far as him covering it up for marriage purpose, his wife knew full well that he cheated on her, he also cheated on all his previous wife, case in point, even now that everyone know he sleep with porn star, she hasn't left him.
Again, he's not being charged for ignoring a red light, he payed someone to kill a story, a story that the public should be allowed to decide whether or not they consider that important when electing someone, the person who covered it up for Trump literally went to jail over this. Shouldn't Trump also go to jail for it? And he also ignored campaign finance law, again maybe you think it's fine if politician spend infinite amount of money in election, but I think there should be less not more money used to elect politician.
He's not POTUS now, and not being charged at the Federal level.
Were you him, would you really not think you do not want your wife reading about you schtupping a hooker in all the news media? I dunno. Maybe you individually are very libertine?
Alan Dershowitz says a prosecutor should never get creative. They have the awesome might of the state behind them. They have the discretion to use it wisely. There are plenty of real, serious crimes out there one doesn't need to be creative about to get a conviction.
With things like Faucci telling Rand Paul he doesn't know what he's talking about when accused of funding gain of function research, which they were, without facing felony perjury charges while this nonsense happens?
We are living in a country with two sets of laws: rules for thee but not for me. And that is very destructive.
It might depend on the case you're referring to, but the one I think you might mean the nanny was convicted of murder by the jury, and the judge upheld the conviction but changed the charge to manslaughter. (And then released her on time already served in remand.)
Correct case. I don't think the jury really believed the 2nd degree murder charge, but the manslaughter charge had been dropped so, it was find her guilty of the 2nd, which they didn't believe or let her go, which they didn't want to do. So, reverse jury nullification. They found her guilty of something the judge found not proven, but he was able to reinstate the manslaughter charge. (My recollection was the defense gambled: it believed leaving it gave the jury an out to convict her of manslaughter: drop it and they have to convict on 2nd... Defense just didn't realize that they'd actually do just that!)
I am no expert of US law, but whilst a judge can overturn a verdict of guilty, I do not believe they can overturn an acquittal.
Sadly correct. The Yankel Rosenbaum case really pissed me off back in the day. But that's how it should go.
Well, here's the thing: Trump is irrevocably corrupt and was so long before even 2016, never mind all the stuff he's added since.
I would argue the reverse is true: the only reason anyone's seriously defending him against being jailed is because he's a politician.
It can be fun to play devil's advocate. I wish Trump would not run as, even if he wins, he becomes the topic. We rehash the past rather than move forward. And he is a spectacularly flawed human being. His way with women alone makes him detestable to people to whom he needs to attract.
But as I've written above, I think this prosecutor is getting wildly creative. Using a fact pattern the direct crimes for which, were he even plausibly guilty of them, blew statute in 2018? This is nuts. I've never seen the kind of derangement for any US politician before. Ever. Not Reagan, not Lori Lightfoot, nobody.
This is lawfare, in politics, where they cannot beat a politician on the merits of his positions, so they use the system they control to undermine him. Kinda like the FBI lying to a FISA court so they can wiretap a major political candidate.
Scary times.