He faces legal peril from prosecutors, the stronger his standing among republicans, which is no doubt why his gop rivals largely avoid confronting him for the 91 Felony Counts he faces. Its why in Ron Desantiss prep for next weeks debate, his super pac has advised him to take a hammer to Vivek Ramaswamy but defend trump if trump is attacked by chris christie. Here was some reaction after Fulton County d. A. Fani willis indicted trump and 18 codefendants for state rico violations. South carolina senator tim scott said this. We see the legal system being weaponized against political opponents. That is unamerican and unacceptable. Vivek ramaswamy said that should he become president , he would pardon trump. And he said this. The reality is this, these are politicized persecutions through prosecution. Trumps former Vice President mike pence, who has criticized trump for putting himself above the constitution, says he prefers that trumps fate be decided, quote, by voters, not criminal courts. Florida Governor Ron Desantis said, i think its an example of the criminalization of politics. I dont think that this is something that is good for the country. Even chris christie, who has been consistently critical of trumps underlying conduct told cnn he thought that jack smiths 2020 election case sufficiently covers trumps alleged georgia charges. I didnt think it was a necessary thing to do once you saw that jack smith was charging him federally for the very same conduct. We would have these discussions amongst federal and State Prosecutors when i was u. S. Attorney and we would work it out so we didnt do these things. Im a little bit concerned this had to do with ego more than anything else. Asa hutchinson also questioned the overreach by the georgia d. A. Only will hurd described the findings as, quote, further evidence that trump knew he lost the 2020 election and was ready to do anything it took to cling to power. Christie, hutchinson and hurd have been the only to criticize trump directly. The rest, fingers to the wind, wont step out against trump until the base tells them the coast is clear. Yet, a new a. P. Poll says 69 of americans overall say they dont want trump to run again. By the way, take a look at that other number, because thats exceeded by the 75 who say they dont want biden to run again. Among republicans, according to the same poll, nearly twothirds or 63 now say they want the former president to run again. Thats actually up from the 55 who said the same thing in april. And 70 of republicans now say theyve got a favorable opinion of a man whos four times indicted up from 60 just two months ago. Think about that for a moment. Donald trump has seen a 10 increase in favorability of republicans after being criminally charged for allegedly taking Nuclear Secrets to his private residence, using false claims of voter fraud to pressure officials to overturn results, and falsifying Business Records to hide a Hush Money Payment to a porn star with whom he had an extramarital affair. I think many republicans who are part of Donald Trumps rise in favorability were prepared to discard the former president on their terms, but not when told they must. When an interloper arrives to a political family squabble, they unify, and instead they turn their aggression on the outsider, much like what often happens when police have to respond to a Domestic Dispute, which is one of the most perilous calls that Law Enforcement must respond. Heres the data. 503 officers nationwide were killed between 2011 and 2020, 43 of them while responding to domestic disturbance or violence calls. Last fall, 27yearold cop who was an air force veteran, killed in colorado while trying to break up a large family disturbance. A cnn piece on this phenomena quoted Professor John shane of the college of Criminal Justice, and he said peoples emotions are already elevated due to whatever dispute theyre involved in, and now you bring in the coercive power of the state. People are angry to see you knowing theres potential to be arrested and incarcerated. This week i tracked down dr. Shane. He has a ph. D. In Criminal Justice from rutgers university. Hes researched specifically in this area. Hes written a number of books. I sent him an email with my offthecuff theory and i asked him if he saw parallels to how a couple in a domestic disturbance unites against a Police Officer in comparison to how trump seems to benefit, at least among republicans, from each indictment. I said, in my theory, the fighting couple are like republicans, perhaps ready to leave one another or leave trump, until such time as an outsider, in this case prosecutors, police, tell them they must separate. Then they rebel against their interloper and they stick together, much like republicans stand with trump. Had the cop not arrived, they might have left one another, they might have had a divorce. Had trump not been indicted, they might have moved to another candidate. I asked Professor Shane for his thoughts. He wrote me back with scientific underpinning of my observation. He said, i can see the parallels. What you describe fits the ingroup outgroup theory of human relations. Although the ingroup members may disagree with one another, they will unite against a common enemy, the outgroup. Research shows outgroup threat has been identified as an important driver of ingroup cohesion among humans. Humans tend to display a certain intolerance toward outgroup behavior, such as policies. So in our example, politics, the ingroup will more easily justify or rationalize their wrong, meaning trumps indictments, as long as it advances their agenda, i. E. , power and prestige because theyre biassed in favor of trump, who holds sway over their constituent base. Although the Domestic Violence victim in this analogy, republicans, would like nothing more than to part ways with trump, that family member, trump, still comes first. Sure, weve had our differences, but blood is thicker than water. Im always here for you no matter what. Makes sense, right, at least to me as an explanation as to why, having been indicted four times, donald trump has seen his position strengthened among republicans. There is, however, a flip side. The reaction among democrats, the exact opposite, maybe like the neighbors who want the homes on their block to be in order, democrats are looking on in horror, ready to take action of their own if the cops cant quell the violence. That same poll found that while most republicans, 74 , said they would support trump in november of 2024, overall 53 of americans said they would definitely not support him if hes the nominee, and another 11 said they probably would not do so. After all, bias tends to bind. Now, many have cited the importance of fani willis indictments as being from a state, not federal prosecutor, because they would not be subject to a pardon should trump or another republican president try to give one. This begs an interesting question. Is it the prosecutors role to worry about the issue of pardons when deciding to bring charges . Cnn Senior Analyst ellie honig raises this point in a piece on his website, the problem with pardon proofing, and hes here to discuss. Should a prosecutor, someone in your old role, ever worry this individual, this defendant may get pardoned and then act accordingly . Michael fani willis d. A. Prompted me to think indepth about that question. My answer is, no, i dont think its proper or appropriate for prosecutors to worry about trying to counteract or prevent pardons. I base that on two principles. The first one is the constitution. The u. S. Federal constitution and most State Constitutions vest the pardon power in the Chief Executive, the president of the United States, and in most states in the governor. If youre a prosecutor, as i once was, you are working as part of the executive branch. Whose job is it then to hand out pardons . Isnt it sort of an arrogant position by prosecutors to say, im going to try to frustrate the will of the Chief Executive who heads the very branch in which i work . I start off with that institutional argument. This is reminiscent for me where im sitting here listening to you and reflecting on a commentary i delivered on cnn a week ago where i was similarly analyzing whether its proper for prosecutors to game out the timing of a trial according to the election calendar. I took the view that thats improper. Do you see parallels between the two . I do, because in the prosecutorial ideal, youre not thinking about politics at all. We strive to be separate from politics. Look at the justice manual, any state a. G. They will say, we have nothing to do with politics, we dont consider politics. Part of the problem with the scheduling of this trial, its obvious doj and all the prosecutors are thinking about the election and theyre trying to get it in before the election. Theyre not saying it, but its clear theyre very much focused on the election. This brings me to my second point about why its problematic for prosecutors to think about counteracting pardons. How are we deciding which pardons were going to try to essentially undo . If youre a federal prosecutor, you fear a president might pardon your case, which case do you send over to the state . Which of the hundreds of pardons that a president will issue, do you call across the state and say, i want you to pick this up . How are we making these decisions, and is it possible to separate those from politics . I dont think it is. I totally get your point. It seems like its a selective prosecution. By the way, this is not some esoteric conversation. If i think of bannon and manafort, how do they fit into what youre describing . Those are two recent examples. Both were charged or convicted federally. Donald trump pardoned both of them on his way out of office. What happened in both instances was State Prosecutors picked up the charge. Paul manafort went really poorly because State Prosecutors in new york charged him after he had been pardoned and the state courts said you cant do that. Thats not fair play. Steve bannon was charged federally, then pardoned by trump, and then recharged by the state. That prosecution remains ongoing. This makes my point. Why should Paul Manafort and Steve Bannon Be Reprosecuted but not any of the hundreds of other people pardoned by donald trump . Pick your president. Are they being picked out simply because theyre seen as politically odious by certain prosecutors . I think thats the only answer and i think thats unacceptable. I guess what youre saying, the same rules ought to apply to trump, no better or worse than any other defendant. People can send all their negative reaction to you on this one and not to me. Please do. Bring it on. Im going to read something from social media. What do we have that loosely applies to what we are discussing . You asserted trump leads in the polls because of his indictments. Nonsense. You are confusing coincidence with causality. Elie, im going to say so long to you. Thank you for being here, as always. Can you put that back on the screen . I dont know if you have the ability to do this. So this person says that i asserted trump leads in the polls because of his indictments. That is absolutely what im saying. Do you have the ability now to put up the full screen that shows the rise in trumps favorability in the last two months . Regardless of whether you can find that okay. You dont have it. I can tell you its gone from 60 to 70 . When i asked david and anyone else watching this question, how else do you explain that trumps Approval Rate was 60 two months ago and now is 70 . I ask you, what else has happened in the last two months pertaining to trump . Has there been any Policy Speech . Has there been any new information about his record . Has he put forth any plan that youve not heard of before . Has he distinguished himself in any way . Nothing has happened. You can make a case about things that have gone well or not well for biden, but in trump world the only thing thats happened in the last two months is hes gotten indicted four times and his numbers have spiked. So it totally fits with the theory ive advanced that it is akin to an outsider coming to a Domestic Dispute and the family thats fighting, they train their guns, figuratively speaking, sometimes not with cops, on the outsider. Ahead, even before any of these trials commence, might donald trump already be ineligible to run for president . Thats the argument two conservative Law Professors advance. They say his conduct already has violated the 14th Amendment Banning candidates who encourage in insurrection or rebellion. How about this one . A catholic massachusetts couple alleges that their Foster Parent application was denied due to their religious views including on lgbtq issues. They contend this violates their First Amendment rights. Might this prove to be yet another repercussion of the recent scotus decisions . I want to know what you think. Go to smerconish. Com and answer this question. Should perspective adoptive parents be required to pledge a willingness to be affirming of a child who may later identify as lbgtqia . And theres this. Toga, toga, toga, the rallying cry of that 1978 frat comedy animal house, i admit to having seen it at least 15 times in the 45 years since it was released, but i never considered the societal change it unleashed. Im going to discuss with a film critic who first saw it as a dartmouth student at an advanced screening on campus. Mr. Dorfman. Hello. 0. 2. Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life, son. Than detergent alone. If you want laundry to smell fresh for weeks, make sure you have Downy Unstopables inwash scent boosters. Cargurus. Shop. Buy. Sell. Online. My name is wendy, im 51 years old, and im a hospital administrator. When i talk to patients you can just see from here up when youre wearing a mask. And i have noticed those lines beginning to really become not so much moderate but more severe. Im still wendy and i got botox® cosmetic. And im really happy with the results because theyre very subtle, and i feel like i look like myself, but just less lines. Botox® cosmetic is fda approved, to temporarily make frown lines, crows feet and forehead lines look better. The effects of botox® cosmetic may spread hours to weeks after injection causing serious symptoms. Alert your doctor right away, as difficulty swallowing, speaking, breathing, eye problems, or Muscle Weakness maybe a sign of a life threatening condition. Do not receive botox® cosmetic if you have a skin infection. Side effects may include allergic reactions, injection site pain, headache, eyebrow, Eyelid Drooping and eyelid swelling. Tell your doctor about your medical history. Muscle or nerve conditions, and medications including botulinum toxins. As these may increase the risk of serious side effects. See for yourself at botoxcosmetic. Com bridget with Thyroid Eye Disease i hid from the camera. And i wanted to hide from the world. For years, i thought my t. E. D. Was beyond help. But then i asked my doctor about tepezza. vo tepezza is the only medicine that treats t. E. D. At the source not just the symptoms. In a Clinical Study more than 8 out of 10 patients taking tepezza had less eye bulging. Tepezza is an infusion. Patients taking tepezza may have infusion reactions. Tell your doctor right away if you experience high blood pressure, fast heartbeat, shortness of breath or muscle pain. Before getting tepezza, tell your doctor if you have diabetes, ibd, or are pregnant, or planning to become pregnant. Tepezza may raise blood sugar even if you dont have diabetes and may worsen ibd such as Crohns Disease or ulcerative colitis. Now, im ready to be seen again. Visit mytepezza. Com to find a ted Eye Specialist and to see bridgets before and after photos. The biggest ideas inspire new ones. 30 years ago, state street created an etf that inspired the world to invest differently. It still does. What can you do with spy . When you find your reason to go on, let it pull you past the doubt. Past the pain, and past your limits. No matter what, we go on. Biofreeze is donald trump right now ineligible to run for president , meaning, before any of these four trials play themselves out, due to the 14th amendment which bans candidates who engaged in insurrection or rebellion . Thats the provocative thesis in a University Of Pennsylvania Law Review article available online. The author is Professor William baud of and Michael Stokes paulson, active members of the conservative legal group, the federalist society. They are proponents of originalism which aims to determine what the original meaning was intended by the constitutions framers. The 14th amendment was ratified in the wake of the civil war. Section 3 says no person shall be a senator or representative in congress or elector of president and Vice President , or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States or any other state who, having previously taken an oath to support the constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebell