Something a bit positive to dwell on.
<![CDATA[<a href="https://www.youtube.com/v/-3EeNEJCCGM" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="bbc_link bbc_flash_disabled new_win">https://www.youtube.com/v/-3EeNEJCCGM</a>]]>Interesting that Kirschner uses the T-word. Before now, most people would say Trump's actions, no matter how abhorrent, fall outside the US definition of treason, which is typically applied only in wartime. But perhaps the Jan 6th public hearings, and how it's come out that Trump
wanted his people to retain their weapons, has got people thinking in broader terms on what constitutes betraying one's country. Certainly it can be said Trump violated his oath of office.
The timing on bringing charges could be problematic though. Charge him before the midterms and it might generate sympathy in the run up to November, just when things are starting to look up for the Democrats. On the flip side, Republicans are privately begging Trump not to declare his candidacy before the midterms, in case it damages their chances even more. But we also know Trump will declare himself for 2024 the moment he gets charged with anything.
The DoJ is supposed to be apolitical, so in such a situation would Garland stick or twist? I'm guessing the DoJ will wait. There's still another round of public hearings in September, so the question is will any further revelations force the DoJ's hand?
