Good morning, kids. One of the real stalwarts of our movement is Professor William Jacobson over at the invaluable Legal Insurrection.com. He and his team consistently produce quality reportage and opinion and as a result earn a considerable number of links each day on this page. That said, it makes it that much harder to criticize someone whom you admire, but with all due respect, I gotta do what I gotta do:

So I think he’s in a lot of legal trouble, and I’ve been saying this on my website for a while and people, you know, attack that. But hey, I live in the real world and the real world is telling us that Donald Trump has a lot of legal problems. He’s probably going to get convicted in one or more of these cases. And people need to wake up and people need to understand what’s happening. And people also need to understand that, while he is not to blame for the hyperpartisan actions of the prosecutors, he left himself very vulnerable. He handed a lot of this stuff to them on a silver platter, and they are now exploiting it. It’s a bad situation.

And now he’s going to roll out, apparently Monday, a new report about Georgia election fraud. I mean, are you kidding me? It’s two and a half years later.

What is the endgame here? Trump supporters don’t seem to understand, what is your endgame? There is no process to decertify an election that took place two and a half years ago. The way you stop this growing totalitarianism is to win the next election, but everything they’re doing is set up to lose the next election. You’ve got to win the next election because Fani Willis and Alvin Bragg and Jack Smith are just the first of a wave of totalitarian attacks using the law enforcement and prosecutorial powers of the state that’s coming our way.

If you read the entire interview, while his analysis of the situation from a purely legal perspective makes complete sense, it nevertheless irks me for a number of reasons.

First of all, like so many other folks he seems to be looking at this situation as if it's normal, or at worst at the extreme limit of normal political discourse. It isn't, and ceased to be that way during the period from 11/8/20 through 1/6/21.

Second, he states, "while he is not to blame for the hyperpartisan actions of the prosecutors, he left himself very vulnerable. He handed a lot of this stuff to them on a silver platter, and they are now exploiting it. It’s a bad situation."

I read and reread the link and nowhere does he elaborate on how he made himself vulnerable. By his words up to, during and in the wake of 1/6 (none of which could possibly be construed by a sane rational person as calling for a violent overthrow of the government)? By his legal actions in the retaining of declassified documents post his departure from office that led to the the Mar-a-Lago FBI Gestapo raid? By a legal NDA with Sloppy Daniels? To my way of thinking, Donald Trump's only vulnerability was and is because he exists and from a policy standpoint alone poses an existential threat to the counter-American revolution that began with Woodrow Wilson, exploded under FDR and was completed with Obama (not to ignore the aiding and abetting by every subsequent GOP administration minus Harding/Coolidge and to a lesser extent Reagan in that time).

Third, and this one is at the heart of what irks me is his assertion that "The way you stop this growing totalitarianism is to win the next election, but everything they’re doing is set up to lose the next election. You’ve got to win the next election because Fani Willis and Alvin Bragg and Jack Smith are just the first of a wave of totalitarian attacks using the law enforcement and prosecutorial powers of the state that’s coming our way."

Professor Jacobson, the reason that this wave of naked totalitarianism is happening in the first place is because 2020 was stolen, and the now institutionalized mechanisms for Democrats to rig all subsequent elections have been thoroughly cemented in place. How do you propose that Donald Trump or for that matter any other GOP candidate win the election or any subsequent election? You rightly rail against, as even I have, Donald Trump re-litigating the 2020 election as a pillar of his 2024 campaign. Yet what happened in 2020 cannot and must neither be ignored nor minimized. But again, to do so presupposes this attitude of "business as usual" when by even the most cursory examination of events and the situation we find ourselves in proves it is anything but.

If I can criticize Trump – and he is not above criticism even with everything happening to him – is that he too seems to be approaching the campaign as well as his persecution as if it's hardball American politics. At least from what I glean of his statements on the campaign trail. In fact, the very act of being on the campaign trail is itself kind of schizophrenic. And that goes for all the other non-hack candidates, of which there are only two, DeSantis and Ramaswamy.

This is why I don't support Trump as a candidate. I support him as a martyr. I don't even think even he'll realize that that's what he is until they strap him in a gurney and get ready to put him to death. Or will he be hanged? As friend of the blog Robert Spencer pointed out a couple of weeks ago, the charges against Trump from Hack Smith include penalties up to and including capital punishment. Given the mindset of who and what is running this junta, and its entire base, and what they have done to this country just in the past 15 years since Obama, do you really think that they would not go all the way wild on that?

If I were Trump, I'd refuse to surrender to this Fanny Willis scumbag, go back to Mar-a-Lago and tell the Feds and the state of Georgia to get fucked. If I were Ron DeSantis, I'd ring Mar-a-Lago with state troopers and National Guardsmen and dare the Junta to try and enter.

Unfortunately, it seems that both Trump and DeSantis are equally willing to play the game when what is needed is for them and everyone like them to kick the damn table over and burn down the casino. Rhetorically speaking.

They won't. And I guess in that sense, Professor Jacobson is correct in his analysis of Trump.

NOTE: The opinions expressed in the links may or may not reflect my own. I include them because of their relevance to the discussion of a particular issue.

ALSO: The Morning Report is cross-posted at CutJibNewsletter.com if you want to continue the conversation all day.

Follow us on Twitter: @CutJibNews
Follow us on Instagram: @Cutjibnewsletter

TIP JAR : Your support helps keep the lights on and is truly appreciated. Note: We are on Stripe, not PayPal.