I am sure Trump will be prosecuted for at least some of his crimes.

However, this is not an instant solution.

Consider:

🔹There is a higher standard of proof in a criminal trial.
🔹getting an impartial jury will be hard, and holdout jurors are a distinct possibility.

1/
🔹prosecuting without convicting can backfire.
🔹conviction won't loosen the support of his supporters. They are immune to truth.

Trump will say the jury was filled with Democrats. The GOP will say the prosecutions are revenge and authoritarian.

My point . . .

2/
. . . is that there are no instant solutions.

It's not like a gutsy prosecutor can bring charges and POOF the GOP will melt like the Wicked Witch and Trump will lose his grip on the Qanon people and Fox will start reporting the truth.

Want to know what would really help?

3/
What will really help is for Democrats to start gaining power in state legislatures and locally elections.

We saw the difference that made in this election.

Local politics matters.

4/
That's because convictions are more likely when the evidence is documentary.

When the evidence is largely testimonial, the jury decides who to believe.

With documents, a jury can't easily go against the weight of the evidence.

This means . . .

5/
Trump, like Manafort, is probably more likely to be charged with crimes in which the evidence is documentary.

My point was not that he won't be convicted.

My point was that this will not solve our problems.

The problems are deeper and harder to fix.

6/
Remember also that it isn't like the prosecutor gets to pick the jury.

There are procedures. Some of the selection is random, and the defense attorney also shapes the jury.

7/

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Teri Kanefield

Teri Kanefield Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @Teri_Kanefield

26 Jan
It looks like 45 Republican Senators voted against holding an impeachment trial for Trump.

I hope nobody had high hopes that the GOP would do the right thing.

The GOP remains the Party of Trump and is hardening into an extremist anti-democratic party.
nytimes.com/live/2021/01/2…
They are the anti-rule of law, anti truth party.
Fortunately, they're outnumbered.

Not by much, but they're outnumbered.
Hi, everyone.

A lot of these doomsday comments are annoying me.

Have you all learned nothing over the past few years?

You might want to duck because, I'm about to go on a tear . . .
Read 9 tweets
24 Jan
The threat is that Trump will create a third party, the "MAGA Party," effectively splitting and dooming the GOP.

Others have talked about calling it the Patriot Party.

As in: Nice little Republican Party you have there. It would be a shame if something happened to it.
Quotation from the article⤵️

Convict me, and I'll destroy your party.

I'd like you to do us a favor, though.

The irony is that the Senate GOP failed to convict Trump when he tried to extort the president of Ukraine.

What's that they say about karma?

washingtonpost.com/politics/trump…
Third parties work very effectively in the U.S. as spoilers.

It's pretty clear that George W. won in 2000 because Ralph Nader siphoned off enough left-wing votes.

And would Clinton have won in 1992 without Ross Perot siphoning off conservative votes?
Read 10 tweets
23 Jan


Spoiler: Yes, partly because the GOP isn't
conservative.

I think this is an interesting question. (Time to get philosophical 🤔)

The place to start, I think is how political psychologists define conservatism.

1/
2/ True conservatives, according to prof. @Jonhaidt, form a kind of yin-yang balance with liberals
ted.com/talks/jonathan…
Liberals embrace forward-looking change.

Conservatives value order.
From Haidt: the conservative insight is that order is hard to achieve and easy to lose.
3/ Reactionaries, on the other hand seek rapid change—backwards to a bygone era.

Other political psychologists (see @karen_stenner) describe conservatives as embracing a desire to maintain the status quo.
Read 12 tweets
20 Jan
I felt confident we'd reach this day.

I also know that the story of right-wing insurgency doesn't end here.

🎶They'll be back, like before🎶
They will fight more fights to win the war.
I always qualified with an "if"

I said "We will get through this if enough people are willing to do the work."

My confidence came from seeing how many people were willing to do the work.
New followers don't know that I adopted you all.

It happened a few years ago when a follower asked me to adopt him. I didn't want to play favorites, so I adopted all my followers.

So you are all Twitter siblings and I expect you all to get along.

Read 5 tweets
19 Jan
This doesn't look good for Trump's chances in the Senate Impeachment Trial.

It's hard to imagine acquitting after making a statement like his one.
He also said this: "We certified the people’s clear choice for their 46th president."

Everyone should read the full statement. It's quite interesting.

It's almost like McConnell doesn't need Trump anymore and isn't afraid of him.
I'm sure McConnell and others want to get rid of Trump as a force in politics.

Trump, on the other hand, has vowed his revenge.

🍿
Read 5 tweets
18 Jan
Actually, they did, and they included a remedy: Impeachment and removal.

The problem we've had the past 4 years isn't just a corrupt president.

The problem is that so many people (including the entire GOP elected leadership) shielded him.
If the elected officials of one party abuse the constitution and get reelected, the problem is with the electorate.

For example, if a majority of Americans decided to reelect Trump--knowing everything we know about him--you can't blame the Constitution.
No laws can protect a democracy if a clear majority of the citizens decide they no longer want a democracy because they will keep electing officials who will destroy rule of law.
Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!