Okay, so I had the opportunity to watch some of the dog-and-pony show from Washington, D.C and I have a few thoughts. Before I get to the trial, though, I want to mention my deep and abiding respect for Officer Eugene Goodman of the Capitol Police. As I watched the riot unfold, it seemed to me that some of the Capitol police were…not entirely opposed to what was happening – perhaps even “on-board.” Just an impression. But Officer Goodman? That dude was everywhere, helping all the victims, and just…doing the right thing. Props to you, Officer Goodman. I wish we had more people like you.

Okay, so back to the trial. First, I don’t think there’s any rational argument against the idea that trump incited the insurrection. (I mean, sure, people can form sentences but are they rational sentences?) It will be interesting to see how the defense responds. Here’s my guess: the defense is going to argue that, sure, a bunch of hyped up nut-balls attacked Congress and tried to kill it’s members and the Vice-President. We all saw the video, there can be no denying. But they didn’t do it because of trump. Simple. Yes, they did it, not trump’s doing. They’ll simply ignore the question of why trump didn’t do anything but praise the attackers along with any other inconvenient features of the House Manager’s arguments. Then will come the vote and the same people who voted against the process being Constitutional will vote against conviction, pretending they do so because they think the process is unconstitutional.

Now, I know Mr. Raskin tried to short-circuit that particular cowardly end-run by pointing out that the Senate debated and voted on the issue and determined, by vote, that the process IS constitutional. That won’t stop people who refuse to do the right thing from seeking ANY cover they can – and that’s all they’ve got. (Now seems like an EXCELLENT time to point out that the trial only took place AFTER the dumbass left office in the first place because the soon-to-be complicit Senate refused to re-convene to address the question before trump left office.) But I have a question.

Why did neither side actually take the question to the Sour Creme Court? Corrupt as they are, the so-called High Court is sitting right now. If EVER there was an issue for that court, this is it, right? It’s a direct question of what is and is not Constitutional. The Republicans could have let themselves and their dear mis-leader off the hook by asking for a SCOTUS ruling. Unless, of course, they suspected the court would not rule in their favor. Likewise, the Democrats could have cut off the cowardly retreat by asking for a ruling. Unless, of course, they suspected the court would not rule in their favor.

As a citizen of the United States of America, first and foremost, I would like to know how the court stands on the issue. If neither side can say with confidence they would win – and I mean enough confidence to actually pose the question to the people with the answer – we really CAN’T know if the process was constitutional. I’m not sanguine about people just…voting for what’s “constitutional,” you know? (Don’t be pedantic. I understand about Amendments…)

I have long understood that, rightly or wrongly, American Presidents don’t go to jail. Ever. Bush 43 started not one but TWO illegal wars in violation of the Geneva Conventions and is guilty of war crimes. He gets to live out his days down in Texas – painting. That’s more than his victims will ever get. But his position has what Reagan called “plausible deniability.” He said someone said they saw Bin Laden in Afghanistan so…off to Afghanistan. Turned out to be a Curve ball. Swing and a miss… Iraq was less…plausible… but people were scared. It’s VERY easy to scare some people…

I thought it would ever be thus, no American President ever going to jail. But there’s nothing debatable – no “plausible deniability” to trump’s actions. Because he couldn’t accept his loss, he tried to foment a rebellion. He tried to overthrow the American government and seize power for himself. I understand the actions in Congress are viewed as a foregone conclusion. Republicans will nullify the proper verdict. But I’m hoping the House Managers have laid out such a compelling case, criminal charges will follow these political charges. Trump delighted in shaking up precedent and tradition. Here’s hoping he topples one more by becoming the first President in the history of this once-great nation to face criminal prosecution of his actions. If the President of the United States can foment rebellion against the United States without consequence, the future of this country is…bleak…