The US Constitution says that someone who is guilty of treason should be put to death. Will that happen? Of course not. I realize that your post is mostly tongue in cheek. However, your hyperbole does not diminish the serious nature of Trump's actions. He needs to be held responsible for attempting to interfere with the lawful transfer of power.

Trump idolizes dictators worldwide. He has no respect for the rule of law(91 criminal indictments). Using ridicule and sarcasm does not diminish the seriousness of the threat to democracy that Trump poses.

Treason has, under the constitution, a strict and specific meaning and it is not the meaning you ascribe to it. What Trump did that applies here is insurrection and sedition. Those are crimes, but not ones that require an automatic death penalty.

Although sometimes Trump's behaviour is consistent with his words - It seems consistent that he would not condemn those carrying signs saying "Hang Pence" (whom he chose as running mate for VP) and that he stated publicly when asked to refute the claim he wanted to be a dictator, said "For just the first day" and mentioned a few things about retribution - but, again, that's not the crux of the issue for me. That issue is he is highly trained and experienced at making deals by telling you what he thinks you want to hear at the moment of the closer. Then and later, it's your tough job to collect. That is not trustworthy, pure and simple.

He has behaved repeatedly just like insurance companies that deny claims on minor, often "trumped up" counter-claims, figuring most will at some point just give up and evaporate.

... who were known terrorists... "There is no negotiation with terrorists." Richard Nixon, 1973.

Every President since Nixon has taken the same position. One which stands out in my memory, mainly because I watched his speech as it was being broadcast live around the globe, is G.W. Bush in 2001.

You don't like Obama, so it didn't matter what he did. What would you have said if Obama had taken a softer approach?
Please. Trump's only purpose is to get elected so that he can pardon himself from all of the indictments and charges against him.

He doesn't care for you, your country or anything else. He'll take your money though.

We have exactly the same thing in the UK, so you can't blame Biden for that! I blame overreaction to covid and the war in Ukraine.

I can understand why we were all panicking during the covid pandemic. It was after all a lethal disease, if only for a small percentage of those who caught it (I think less than 1% even during the alpha wave). But politics should be about balancing different needs against each other, and sacrificing the economy turned out to be a bad mistake in retrospect.

It was also a bad mistake for Western Europe to become so dependent on Russian oil and gas. The Ukrainian war cut off both those and the Ukrainian wheat that fed the world. Of course everything is more expensive now.

The "overreaction to covid" is an understatement. At my workplace, colleagues were out with covid on numerous occasions, no one died, 1 was hospitalised, but he was very overweight and in bad health.

I have had it at least 6 times and no one bothers testing anymore. The hysteria was entirely driven by the media, big corporations and the regime. Big Tech and the world's billionaires did extremely well out of the crisis. All of a sudden "the government cares" - work it out for yourself...

A "lethal disease" is something like cancer, ebola, malaria or bubonic plague - you seem to be just giving lip service and following the narrative. Covid was massively overblown. It's still about, but the media got bored and moved on to Ukraine and other things.

You write as if covid was a static thing, but viruses are alive and they mutate and evolve. No virus actually wants to make you ill; they want you out and partying and spreading them around. Covid was dangerous at first (and it really did kill a lot of people in the first few waves) because it was a recent importation into our species. It's really a disease of bats and didn't know how to behave in a human host.

Omega covid was the first really human-adapted covid virus and that was the point at which it ceased to be a serious problem. Of course vaccinating all the old people helped a lot too.

The 'known' terrorist was already dead. Abdulrahman Al-Aulaqi, a 16-year-old boy born in Denver along with his teenage cousin were 'zotted'out of existence like Zeus throwing a lightning bolt two weeks later. I guess just for insurance. Officials said, after the fact, that it was a mistake and they were targeting someone else. Good luck on finding out if that was true because the people who know how many innocent civilians have been 'collateral damage' to drone strikes, no matter if it was ordered by Obama, Bush, or Trump aren't talking. Lawsuits over the matter were dismissed. You are correct, I ended up not liking Obama but I voted for him his first term because I thought he would be good for the Country. Boy, was I wrong!
"In Al-Aulaqi v. Panetta (Al-Awlaki v. Panetta) the groups charge that the U.S. government's killings of U.S. citizens Anwar Al-Aulaqi, Samir Khan, and 16-year-old Abdulrahman Al-Aulaqi in Yemen last year violated the Constitution's fundamental guarantee against the deprivation of life without due process of law.

The killings were part of a broader program of "targeted killing" by the United States outside the context of armed conflict and based on vague legal standards, a closed executive process, and evidence never presented to the courts."

Anwar Al-Aulaqi and Samir Khan were killed in a U.S. drone strike in Yemen on September 30, 2011. Abdulrahman Al-Aulaqi, a 16-year-old boy born in Denver, was killed in a U.S. drone strike in Yemen on October 14, 2011, while he was eating dinner at an outdoor restaurant with his teenage cousin.

According to the groups’ legal complaint, the killings violated the right to due process under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution, the prohibition on unreasonable seizures under the Fourth Amendment, and, with respect to Anwar Al-Aulaqi, the ban on extrajudicial death warrants imposed by the Constitution’s Bill of Attainder Clause. The killings also violated international law, which is incorporated through the Constitution." https://www.aclu.org/cases/al-aulaqi...rgetedkillings

So you are seriously telling me that "the sitting President of the United States" committed 'insurrection and sedition' based only on what he said. While he, himself, was [still ...] the "Supreme Commander" of the very Government that he 'sought to overthrow?'

I'm looking for the "million-man Army, armed to the teeth," that he was supposed to be giving orders to. And, I'm still looking.

Even though Article 2, Section 3 mandates that the President "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed."

Okay – I get it. Now, let's change the game just a little bit. Didn't you know that President Obama ... say ... also "gave an address," and a bunch of yokels decided that this was a "call to overthrow the Government?" This obviously means that the President "committed an act of insurrection and sedition" by his address. (Now, let's go back to every other President who is still alive ... We can deal with the problem of "no one in his right mind is now willing to ever become President" at some other time.)

Surely by now you get my point. "The President is like no other single individual in our system of Government." Precisely because (s)he is, individually, "The Executive Branch."

Many existing SCOTUS decisions, some over two hundred years old now, have addressed the problems and the privileges and the plenary powers of this ... individual. And, they have also dealt with previous politically-motivated attacks on this Office.

Because, let's face it: there are over 2,200 counties in this nation who can "convene a Grand Jury." What would happen if any of them could simply "decide for themselves that '(s)he has committed a crime,'" and sentence him to prison ... forever? We wouldn't have "Article 2" anymore.

Exactly, anyone using the term 'insurrection' is just being silly. Of the +/- 1150 charged and indicted so far for Jan. 6th there are only 5 'firearms' charges and as near as I can tell only one of them is for possessing a firearm while inside the Capitol compound.
"1:21-cr-26 ALBERTS, Christopher Michael Maryland December 20, 2021
1:21-cr-4 COFFMAN, Lonnie Leroy DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, Washington April 1, 2022
1:21-cr-496 IBRAHIM, Mark Sami DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, Washington August 6, 2021
1:21-cr-159 MEREDITH Jr., Cleveland Grover DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, Washington February 4, 2022
1:21-cr-32 REFFITT, Guy Wesley TEXAS, Bonham August 1, 2022
https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/capi...sort_order=ASC "

On a somewhat related note. Putin endorses Biden for the presidency. This was unexpected. Thoughts?

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-68303231

Sure, Putin's analysts have told him that Biden is rapidly approaching late stage dementia.

There is ample evidence that Trump's ability to put together sentences or read text is rapidly deteriorating. Look at Trump's speeches from the 90s and compare them to today. Trump is in a free fall. It's only going to get worse for Trump. In the next while he'll have a large financial penalty (probably 500+ million) and his first conviction may come this Spring.

Even someone with late stage dementia would be preferable to having Trump as president again. The world is fucked if he gets in.

It looks those particular 5 people were charged with illegally carrying a weapon regardless of where they were. Most were charged with illegally entering, parading in the Capital building as well as trying to obstruct a proceeding. I recently heard on the radio that Enrique Tarrio who was basically in charge of planning the "event" was sentenced to 22 years. If you believe the J6 investigation Trump's inner circle had previously communicated with the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers.