If by effect you mean reduce his popularity with them, no. There will be an effect though. All those prosecutors will be getting more and more serious death threats. The FBI used to take a pretty dim view on threatening prosecutors, so those of us on the “left*” will be watching to see if there are arrests by the FBI of folks making these threats. Being incarcerated could suppress his voters to some extent.
* At this point “left” would mean not authoritarian/fascist. Good work on that Fox, Limbaugh, Levin, Savage et al.
He’s only in “deep trouble” if enough of the right people in the right positions of power decide he is. There is no objective standard for punishing bad behavior. Just ask the nice former Nazis who helped put Neil Armstrong on the fucking moon. There is no punishment if you’re useful.
Really doesn’t Trump comment say it all. Regarding the Mar-a-Largo recording, “I don’t know anything about it. All I know is I was right.” One definition of cult which seems apt is a misplaced or excessive admiration for a particular person or thing, ‘ a cult of personality surrounding the leaders.’
trump sez “everything I did was right”
BULLSHIT
Was moving boxes of docs to MaL right?
No, it was ILLEGAL.
Was refusing to return them to the National Archives when asked multiple times over months right?
No, it was obstruction which is ILLEGAL
Was bragging about and handling classified docs in front of people not cleared to see them “perfect”?
No, it was ILLEGAL under the Espionage Act.
Btw
Two of the three illegalities I mentioned carry 20 year prison sentences.
Obviously, U.S. corporate and government power have always been closely mingled in both foreign and domestic policy. The United States was knocking over governments for the benefit of the U.S. financial sector while claiming to defend freedom and stability well before Kissinger ever gained influence. But Kissinger was the first to really show how the celebrity bestowed by government power could be parlayed into a massively profitable post-government career as a paid adviser to powerful multinational corporations and foreign governments.
Describing the thinking behind the new phenomenon in a 1986 piece, Les Gelb, a former U.S. official turned New York Times national security correspondent who would later serve as the president of the Council on Foreign Relations, wrote, “Many of these former Government leaders asked themselves, why not capitalize on our stardom, international contacts, and inside knowledge to make large incomes on our own?”
They answered their own question by going out and doing just that, and Henry the K led the pack. “Kissinger’s 41 years of consulting service include American Express, Fiat, Rio Tino, Lehman Brothers, Merck, Heinz, Volvo and JP Morgan,” Ben Judah, a leading expert on kleptocracy and anti-corruption, tweeted recently. “His business career was truly pioneering in Washington.”
In recent decades, numerous “strategic consulting” firms have been launched by big foreign policy names. “Kissinger helped normalize this dynamic of being a consultant to big business and a public policy voice,” wrote Vox’s Jonathan Guyer, whose reporting has tracked the rise of these firms and their influence on policymaking. Guyer homes in on the key question: “Is it ethical for a former senior official to continue to serve on federal advisory boards that give policy recommendations to the Pentagon, the State Department, or the president while also advising companies that are likely to profit from those geopolitical decisions?”
The foreign policy establishment seems to have definitively answered that question in the affirmative. And that poses a problem for our foreign policy, as it gives powerful, wealthy, and unaccountable interests yet more avenues for influence in a political system that’s already heavily gamed in their favor.
