Trump indicted

**tn1911** · 03-31-23, 10:19

Originally Posted by SomeOtherGuy

Posts 33-39 really hit it, as I see it too. The USA is F'd.

Remember kids, the American Revolution is about the only violent revolution that had a happy ending and was followed by relative peace and stability. Everywhere else, revolution lead to decades or more of violence and turmoil.

On a brighter note, the total collapse of the USSR and various satellites, East Germany in particular, was followed by better times in most areas. So when MTG and others talk about "national divorce" or similar, don't be too quick to dismiss it as our best hope for a decent future.

I’m not a fan but just curious, how do you see a national divorce playing out? Some sort of slow balkanization or just all over civil war?

**SomeOtherGuy** · 03-31-23, 10:36

Originally Posted by tn1911

I’m not a fan but just curious, how do you see a national divorce playing out? Some sort of slow balkanization or just all over civil war?

My crystal ball is old and cloudy. There are a million possible scenarios and you could spend a weekend discussing nothing else.

I don't foresee a widespread civil war, although it's possible, nor do I expect it to be slow. I would look at the 1989-1991 era for some guidance.

I expect that one large state with a strong-man type governor will announce its departure after some national political event it doesn't like. This could be California if Trump gets re-elected, or Texas or Florida for numerous reasons. The lead state will be followed in days by neighboring states that are close in mind - OR, WA and HI for CA, or part of the gulf coast plus maybe SC in the case of TX or FL being the lead. National politicians will threaten war against them (as Biden and others, like that disgusting CA congressman, have already done), but little or nothing will actually happen. There will be weeks or more of awkward pause, then other states, both aligned and polar-opposite to the lead, will start making their departures too.

Look at a map of "red states" and figure that alliances will generally require proximity. Most likely the deep south and great plains would make one alliance, the pacific coast (excluding rural, inland parts of those states) would make one, and the core union centered around NY would make a third. The inland northwest around Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Utah and neighboring portions of states might do its own thing or join the Texas-FL-gulf-plains bloc. States not mentioned could go multiple ways, including totally independent or additional blocs. New Mexico might just join Mexico, formally or de facto. The midwest and mid-atlantic would be the greatest mess given the "purple" nature of many states and the extreme disagreement in many of those states between the largest city and 99% of the rural areas.

Just one possibility, who knows.

**Alex V** · 03-31-23, 10:51

Originally Posted by SomeOtherGuy

My crystal ball is old and cloudy. There are a million possible scenarios and you could spend a weekend discussing nothing else.

I don't foresee a widespread civil war, although it's possible, nor do I expect it to be slow. I would look at the 1989-1991 era for some guidance.

I expect that one large state with a strong-man type governor will announce its departure after some national political event it doesn't like. This could be California if Trump gets re-elected, or Texas or Florida for numerous reasons. The lead state will be followed in days by neighboring states that are close in mind - OR, WA and HI for CA, or part of the gulf coast plus maybe SC in the case of TX or FL being the lead. National politicians will threaten war against them (as Biden and others, like that disgusting CA congressman, have already done), but little or nothing will actually happen. There will be weeks or more of awkward pause, then other states, both aligned and polar-opposite to the lead, will start making their departures too.

Look at a map of "red states" and figure that alliances will generally require proximity. Most likely the deep south and great plains would make one alliance, the pacific coast (excluding rural, inland parts of those states) would make one, and the core union centered around NY would make a third. The inland northwest around Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Utah and neighboring portions of states might do its own thing or join the Texas-FL-gulf-plains bloc. States not mentioned could go multiple ways, including totally independent or additional blocs. New Mexico might just join Mexico, formally or de facto. The midwest and mid-atlantic would be the greatest mess given the "purple" nature of many states and the extreme disagreement in many of those states between the largest city and 99% of the rural areas.

Just one possibility, who knows.

This is exactly how I see it. The only "war" will be internal to states where densely populated blue cities are surrounded by red rural area. The fight will be over which side to join as the cities and rural areas will want to join opposing factions. That will play out fairly straight forward though will be messy. The rural areas will oust the leaders of the blue cities who's protectors usually live in the rural red areas anyway. The people in the blue cities will fall in line or flee. This will most likely include states like TN, KY, NC, GA, possibly VA, PA, and OH. NC, GA and VA may be the fastest to have their cities taken over due to the large contingent of mostly conservative military personal but that's just a guess.

**Entryteam** · 03-31-23, 13:12

Originally Posted by hotbiggun42

All candidates running against Trump as Repulicans need to withdrawl immediatley and support Trump.

Im sending $$$ to Trumps re election fund. Join me give until it hurts!

I don't flush money down the toilet. But you do you.

**HKGuns** · 03-31-23, 13:29

Originally Posted by hotbiggun42

All candidates running against Trump as Repulicans need to withdrawl immediatley and support Trump.

Im sending $$$ to Trumps re election fund. Join me give until it hurts!

What planet have you lived on for the past 6 years? They're more likely to do the exact opposite and use this as "evidence" he's unelectable to further their own interests. I'd imagine there were more than a few Republican's in leadership pushing NY to do just this.............

**WillBrink** · 03-31-23, 14:55

As the actual details of the charges are hard to come by, a decent summary from Reason. I now have a much better understanding of it all, and it's clear it's pure political theater that will backfire on them and just bolster Trumps popularity:

https://reason.com/2023/03/31/the-sh...ical-opponent/

**vicious_cb** · 03-31-23, 15:41

Originally Posted by WillBrink

As the actual details of the charges are hard to come by, a decent summary from Reason. I now have a much better understanding of it all, and it's clear it's pure political theater that will backfire on them and just bolster Trumps popularity:

https://reason.com/2023/03/31/the-sh...ical-opponent/

As Ive said before in another thread the actual charges matter little, the whole point of this is to distract from the banking crisis, rising inflation, trans school shootings not to mention all the foreign stuff.

All they want to get out of this is to parade Trump in handcuffs or in a courtroom, doesnt matter one bit if charges dont stick, its all about the optics and headlines they can generate for clicks.

**glocktogo** · 03-31-23, 15:49

Originally Posted by HKGuns

What planet have you lived on for the past 6 years? They're more likely to do the exact opposite and use this as "evidence" he's unelectable to further their own interests. I'd imagine there were more than a few Republican's in leadership pushing NY to do just this.............

I just watched Neil TDS Cavuto badger Mike Pence for 15 straight minutes in an attempt to get him to attack Trump, and he refused. If anyone has a reason to attack Trump it's Pence, and he wouldn't. Cavuto looked like a complete chump, but he's still digging. He's made his entire show today an attack on Trump, and all its gonna do is piss off Trump supporters.

Everyone knows this is pure election tampering by Bragg and his ComDem cohorts. If they're desperate enough to resort to this, they're obviously willing to burn their own ships to motivate their voters.

**SomeOtherGuy** · 03-31-23, 15:57

Originally Posted by glocktogo

Everyone knows this is pure election tampering by Bragg and his ComDem cohorts. If they're desperate enough to resort to this, they're obviously willing to burn their own ships to motivate their voters.

What's the quote - "don't interrupt your enemy when they are making a mistake"?