What could happen to Trump now that he has been indicted?

SGM (Join to see) - You don’t know what my side is. Don’t assign opinions to me. I’m perfectly capable of speaking for myself.

Guilty or Not Guilty - the NY "Statue of Limitations" has expired.

Regardless of Guilty or Not Guilty the New York state legal date under their 'Statue of Limitations' has expired. Under their own law the case should never have been filed.
SFC Kathy Pepper - LTC Kevin B. - SGM (Join to see) - SFC Kathy Pepper -

SGM (Join to see) billionaire Bloomberg also has many women who have a non-disclosure agreement and have been paid off as alleged by someone I can't recall on Fox business News who was a guest. It makes sense though it may not be proven.
SGM (Join to see) COL Randall C. Sgt (Join to see) Sgt (Join to see) SFC Ralph E Kelley SPC Robert Coventry SPC Robert Coventry SFC James Corona PO1 (Join to see)

SSgt Richard Kensinger - And much of it is factual and will be revealed during his trials.
Rich

SSgt Richard Kensinger - Can you please give a link to where you got your information?

SN Michael Smith - During his indictments and subsequent trials covered by reporters. I've also conducted extensive clinical research into Donald back to his mid adolescence.
If you are interested in my published research I can send copies of my articles. They are clinical in perspective. Contact me [login to see] .
Also review the Mueller Report and the findings of the J6 committee.
Rich

SN Michael Smith SPC Tracy Charpentier SGT John Schmelzkopf We must keep in mind that those who lean Left will provide all kinds of information, such as from Leftist CNN (Chinese News Network), MSDNC, or referencing “the Mueller report, J6 Committee” (several of many railroad jobs to take Trump down for good). But info fr these type sources still doesn’t prove actual truth, esp. because extreme bias is involved regarding the subject.
We have to know when “discussions” or arguments are futile.

SFC Kathy Pepper - It may very well be trivial, noting what the DA said before taking office about going after Trump. Personally, I have no desire to see ANY president indicted or put in jail. I've told you in other conversations, I have no love for Trump. However, I do believe in the rule of law and enforcing it vs using it for political gain. The actions of this DA appear (but let's see these charges first) to be both personal and political vs actually wanting to enforce the law. Especially when looking at the record of this DA and all of the crimes he has not pursued. Assaults, robbery, violence, drugs, murder... all going up in his state. And he's going to settle on what may possibly amount to be improper payments to keep a porn star quiet about an alleged affair? I'd say "is that the hill he wants to die on," but he probably will not face any disciplinary actions for levying these charges against a former President, regardless of whether they turn out to be false or frivolous.

Here's the thing. If the Democrats are trying to sway voters away from Trump, specifically from a base which has a deep love and respect for law enforcement and adherence to the law, this is not going to do it. For God's sake, I just want the primaries to come so I can have my say which, like the first time, might be to again say no to Trump. But should he become the nominee, what makes the Democrat leaders and strategist think I would want to cast my vote for them when all they're doing is using the law to suit their agenda rather than to ensure justice. I'm finding more examples of them using the law in such a manner compared to actually enforcing it. They're essentially weaponizing the law and this needs to stop. I don't like what I'm seeing from the left because it is essentially everything they are accusing Trump of. But boy am I ready to cast my vote against the current and worst President of my lifetime.

Maj Kevin "Mac" McLaughlin - If you "believe in the rule of law and enforcing it", then why does the prosecutor's motivation matter? If he's able to prove it in a court of law, a crime is a crime and it should be prosecuted and punished. If you are willing to give someone a pass because of political considerations, then you really don't "believe in the rule of law and enforcing it". Your perspective would also political. It sounds like your perspective is "If the prosecutor's motivation is political, let the crime slide." I disagree. A crime is a crime, and they all should be punished appropriately.

It's not that simple and I think you know that. If not, you're missing the point. We've all done something which does not fully comply with the law; speeding, jaywalking, made a mistake on our taxes, etc. But what we don't have is some Police Officer or prosecutor following us around waiting for us to make that mistake or going through our life history for the purpose of finding those transgressions for a political purpose. It's personal, it political, and walks a slippery slope. This will not end well between the parties.

Now, with that said, I am not saying President Trump should get away with any crimes he may have committed. By all means if he actually broke a law, punish him. But we all know currently, that this could be more akin to Al Capone getting arrested for jay walking, not tax evasion. All for what? To politically embarrass the former President? As I said earlier, I don't want to see this kind of partisan back and forth from either side of the political spectrum, and yet this is where it will lead to. All so the prosecutor could get a mug shot and hand the former President a parking ticket while his city has much more serious problems.

SEMPER FI!