What does the future hold for Donald Trump? - threadbans in OP

This is all very delicious. Trump and the Republicans were overjoyed when FBI director Comey decided to help them win the election with a last minute lie about Clinton and the nonexistent national security question about her email servers, and now they are all incensed at The FBI investigating Trump for a possibly real National security breach.

You couldn't make it up.

Whichever way this goes, Trump will not end up behind bars. The US simply could not cope with an Ex Potus in jail. It would be awful from an international POV.

If Trump is anything, the guy knows a deal. It usually entails others paying the price and him walking away, but that might well be the best option for everyone concerned.

Trump simply agrees to remove himself from political life. No more rallies, no endorsements. It suits the country, it certainly suits the GOP and it is going to suit Trump as the likely alternative is possible jail time.

You're missing one of the key points of irony. Trump signed into law, presumably at a dig at HC, the very thing he's being prosecuted for

Trouble is though, if Trump struck a deal that he simply exits politics, doesn't even endorse candidates, exits public life etc, then it'll be claimed that all the investigations and charges were political in nature and just done to stop him running from President again. It'll also not stop him using mouthpieces or advising from behind the scenes.

I don't think a deal can be done. I think charges have to be brought to their conclusion. It'll never result in jail time, probably house arrest to Mar A Lago. But I think any kind of deal only benefits Trump.

He's absolutely petrified.

"... who got more votes, by far, than any sitting President in the history of our Country..."

Christ, he is still such a salty little b*tch.

There are regulations about deliberately distorting the news for any broadcaster who is registered with the FCC which Fox is. However, it's an extremely hard case to prove when it comes to opinion and 'analysis' where there is often a tiny grain of truth that allows the 'honest belief' defence and the complaint can only be brought by a whistleblower who has evidence from

Broadcasting false content during news programming

The FCC is prohibited by law from engaging in censorship or infringing on First Amendment rights of the press. It is, however, illegal for broadcasters to intentionally distort the news, and the FCC may act on complaints if there is documented evidence of such behavior from persons with direct personal knowledge. For more information, please see our consumer guide, Complaints About Broadcast Journalism.

We can all suspect very strongly that the likes of Tucker Carlson is deliberately distorting the news but to prove intent you would need documentary evidence that he told someone that he know his 'analysis' is wrong but he is going to report it anyway because he intends to distort that news

Anything that disproves their lies is 'Fake News' if the audience even get to see such a rebuttal. Most Fox viewers live in a bubble of Pro-Trump media and never see anything outside of that.

Its scary how insulated they can be from the facts

Can you imagine what they'd be like if he was actually sent to jail?

Could we just refuse him entry on the basis hes a danger to national security.........wherever he goes?

There aren't.

The point I was trying to make was that laws only hold when there are enough people willing to observe them. If not, they're not worth the paper they're printed on. So, if Trump does get convicted of something in relation to this raid and is, by law, barred from running again, what happens if the Republican party and red states just decide not to observe that barring? Maybe blue states would observe it, but then red states might, in retaliation, strike certain candidates of their ballots, and all of a sudden the temperature has been significantly raised.