Opinion Guess who’s holding Trump accountable? Regular American jurors - Benjamin Franklin famously remarked that the US would stay a republic, ‘if you can keep it’. Everyday Americans are doing just that.

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
1690338098502.png

Former US President Donald Trump speaks to campaign volunteers at the Elks Lodge, July 18, 2023, in Cedar Rapids, Iowa. A target letter sent to Donald Trump suggests that a sprawling Justice Department investigation into efforts to overturn the 2020 elections is zeroing in on him [Charlie Neibergall/AP Photo/ File]

Shortly after the United States Constitutional Convention ended on September 17, 1787, Dr Benjamin Franklin stepped out of what is known today as Independence Hall in Philadelphia into the summer sun.


For four months, Franklin and the other 54 delegates present had negotiated a four-page Constitution that established the US government from the disparate threads of 12 of the 13 original states.
A woman approached Franklin. “Well, Doctor, what have we got – a republic or a monarchy?”


“A Republic, if you can keep it,” Franklin replied.


Franklin’s remark was, at once, a celebration and a warning. A fragile federation had been born, bound by a newly minted constitution.


Inevitably, Franklin implied, that bond would be tested. In those trying circumstances, vigilance by all would be vital to keeping the republic whole.


More than two centuries later, Franklin’s prophecy came to pass yet again in a nation whose history teems with tumult and division.


On January 6, 2021, the US’s republic was tested by an insurrection. A mob, primed and encouraged by an angry, vanquished president, attacked the Capitol with one aim: to prevent the certification by Congress of Joe Biden’s election as president.


The insurrection failed. Most members of Congress, who had taken shelter from the marauding mob, emerged later that jarring day determined to fulfil their constitutional duty to ratify the new president’s decisive victory.


Since then, scores of the insurrectionists have been arrested, charged and convicted for their often violent roles in the thwarted coup d’état.



On July 24, a truck driver from Arkansas was sentenced to 52 months in jail for beating a police officer with a flagpole while shouting: “That entire building is filled with treasonous traitors. Death is the only remedy for what’s in that building.”


So far, the chief architect of the madness and mayhem has evaded the same fate.


Happily, it appears that Donald Trump’s reprieve is about to end.


Last week, Special Counsel Jack Smith sent Trump a letter informing him that he was a “target” of a probe into the cacophonous events of January 6th and invited him to testify before a grand jury considering indicting the defeated president.


Trump’s carousel of lawyers rejected the special counsel’s offer, insisting their rule-of-law-allergic client had “done nothing wrong” and, with typical bluster, accusing Smith of being Biden’s handmaiden.


Apparently, a grand jury disagrees.


Trump could soon be charged with a slew of counts in connection to three felonies, including conspiracy, obstruction and witness tampering.


If that happens, it will mark the third time Trump has been indicted since March. He is, of course, the first former president to face such a blunt legal reckoning.


Trump’s long rap sheet reflects the sorry character of a career crook-turned-president.


He is a philanderer and a liar who pays hush money to a mistress to keep her mum.


He is a raging narcissist who hoards reams of the nation’s secrets, brandishing them like a petulant child eager to impress and soothe his insatiable ego.


He is a confidence man who revels in and exploits for his parochial ends the ignorance, malice and manufactured grievances of his maniacal followers.


Most egregious of all, he is a conniving impostor who betrayed his oath to “preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States”.


Dissatisfied, a few liberal commentators grumble that the indictments, while welcomed, represent an anti-climactic denouement that may or may not result in Trump’s comeuppance or political demise.


I share a bit of their chagrin. I have written about Trump’s persistent and perplexing popularity even in the face of a host of criminal charges that, if decency or probity mattered, should have disqualified the 45th president from becoming commander-in-chief once more.


Still, I remain convinced that these occasionally grating curmudgeons miss the reassuring meaning and purpose of Trump’s indictments.


The ordinary, anonymous Americans who constitute the three grand juries which, to date, have charged or are expected to charge a vulgar simpleton who was cloaked in enormous power as president have heeded Franklin’s call to keep their republic intact.


They are doing their part in corralling an unrepentant scoundrel who yearns to exercise the privileges and prerogatives of an omnipotent monarch.


This is an essential act of citizenship that has required enlightened Americans to reject – sometimes at great risk and usually with little fanfare – the sinister designs of a demagogue who prefers autocracy to democracy.


So was the defiance of largely anonymous Capitol police officers, motivated no doubt, in part, by the imperative to preserve, protect and defend the US Constitution. They stood their ground despite being outnumbered, overwhelmed and hurt in body, mind and spirit.


They prevailed.


Rather than wallow in disappointment, forlorn liberal writers ought to applaud the resolve of honourable Americans who have held a dishonourable president to stiff account. They have acted as a bulwark – as Franklin envisioned – against a “populist” charlatan intent on extinguishing the republic in his obsessive pursuit of money, power and vengeance.


The delicious irony is that, ultimately, Trump’s fate will be decided by the kind of everyday, anonymous Americans he detests and to whom he would deny membership at his gilded monument to kitsch and extravagance, Mar-a-Lago.


Trump has bullied and berated much of the Republican Party into complicity and silence.


He did not count on the legion of wise Americans who refuse to be intimidated into complicity or silence – inside a courtroom or at the ballot box.


However frayed, it is their republic – not Trump’s – and they intend to keep it.
-------------
https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/...ing-trump-accountable-regular-american-jurors (archived)
 
Cool, I agree that the President shouldn't be above the law.

So are they going to look into Biden's dirty laundry in Ukraine, or is that (D)ifferent?
 
Cool, I agree that the President shouldn't be above the law.

So are they going to look into Biden's dirty laundry in Ukraine, or is that (D)ifferent?
Hunter Biden is an upstanding citizen of the United States and his laptop is full of wonderful poems extolling the virtues of humanitarian aid groups.
 
Al-Jizzrag dune coon journoniggers are in no position to lecture anyone on who is an "ordinary American".
 
It took 26 “paragraphs” for this article to actually get to the point it was trying to make. This article could have been one sentence Trump bad grand jury good.
 
If I ever get accused of something serious I'm requesting a bench trial. An illiterate gap toothed negress that can barely string two sentences together is not my fucking peer and has no business judging me or anyone else.
 
Trump’s long rap sheet reflects the sorry character of a career crook-turned-president.


He is a philanderer and a liar who pays hush money to a mistress to keep her mum.


He is a raging narcissist who hoards reams of the nation’s secrets, brandishing them like a petulant child eager to impress and soothe his insatiable ego.


He is a confidence man who revels in and exploits for his parochial ends the ignorance, malice and manufactured grievances of his maniacal followers.


Most egregious of all, he is a conniving impostor who betrayed his oath to “preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States”.
Gee, no libel and defamation there at all. If trump gets off of all this the reeeing from all corners of the internet should be very interesting
 
Sure, they were just regular American jurors. I am sure they weren't hand picked and were only showed what they wanted them to see. You know, everything to make Trump seem guilty. Like the civil case involving that old bitch in New York that said Trump did something to her or whatever. Trump wasn't allowed to show any evidence or witnesses. It was just believe the crying bitch cause wahmen.
 
Why would I need to guess? That's how it's supposed to work if you understand our system of government. What do you think, a "jury of your peers" means all the living former Presidents got together to indict him? Gonna have to be a bench trial with how many there are, I think.

And simpleton? Dude he graduated from Wharton in the 60s, not whatever Canadian Cuck Castle you crawled out of.
 
Remember when it was revealed after the Chauvin trial that one of the jurors was a very obvious BLM activist and nothing was done about it?
 
If I ever get accused of something serious I'm requesting a bench trial. An illiterate gap toothed negress that can barely string two sentences together is not my fucking peer and has no business judging me or anyone else.
Wrong

The correct thing to do is take your jury trial, then on day one of proceedings in front of the jury start talking about jury nullification and refuse to stop

Watch the judge's head explode and a mistrial eventually declared again and again and again
 
God I hate these disingenuous scumfucks so fucking much.
One day they'll tell you with a straight face how some dindu with a double digit kill count won't get a fair trial because he's being tried in a majority white area and therefore the jury will be comprised of evil racist white people instead of his fellow future astronauts.
Then the next they'll spout this shit and pretend like jury trials weren't worked around to be as corrupt and easily fucked over as soon as possible. For fucks sake we have entire films dedicated to the notion of juries being easily biased and ignorant at best and comically, laughably stupid and evil at worst - think 12 Angry Men or Let's Go to Prison. Even without thumbs on the scales, what right minded person wants to be judged by their "peers" when their peers are probably at least 50% comprised of people whose entire legal knowledge came from judge Judy and law and order SVU?

However much you hate these people I promise you it's not enough.
 
Al-Jizzrag dune coon journoniggers are in no position to lecture anyone on who is an "ordinary American".
Technically Al Jazeera is filled with leftists and white shitlibs as far as the English department goes.

These Qataris are duplicitous by promoting globohomo while keeping the pozzed elements out.
 
Wrong

The correct thing to do is take your jury trial, then on day one of proceedings in front of the jury start talking about jury nullification and refuse to stop

Watch the judge's head explode and a mistrial eventually declared again and again and again
I should have also said that if you do this the judge will toss you in jail for contempt and you're gonna be sitting in there for a while. But it's impossible for the judge to completely stop you from wrecking the proceedings by bringing up jury nullification over and over again
 
Back
Top Bottom