Trump's prison presidency? How he could run — and win — from behind bars.

The notion was once unthinkable.

More recently, purely theoretical.

Now, there’s a legitimate chance Donald Trump could be running for president, or even serving as commander in chief, from behind bars.

Two overriding factors contribute to this bizarre reality.

Firstly, there’s very little — legally speaking — preventing Trump from doing so.

POLL: Should Trump be allowed to run for office?

Secondly, Trump himself has offered no indication he’ll step away. To the contrary, he’s as emboldened as ever to run for and win the presidency he lost in 2020.

To recap:

For the first time in U.S. history, a grand jury on June 8 federally indicted a former president — Trump — on 37 felony counts related to the alleged willful retention of classified documents and conspiracy to conceal them.

Then it happened again on Aug. 1 when Trump was indicted on a four separate federal counts related to his alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election. And just under two weeks later, he was indicted in Georgia related to election interference in the state as well.

Separately, Trump is charged in New York with 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in relation to payments the Trump Organization made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels. His trial is slated for March 2024, in the midst of the Republican presidential primary.

ALSO READ: Inside the 11 scenarios that deny Trump the presidency — without him actually losing Election 2024

In total, Trump faces 91 felony charges across four cases. If convicted, he could face significant prison time. In the meantime, his social media outbursts in potential violation of pretrial instructions and release terms have raised the question of whether a judge would dare throw the former president in jail.

Such a laundry list of legal woes could sabotage any politician’s campaign efforts. But the looming federal indictment and other pending cases haven’t slowed Trump down in his pursuit of a second term as president or slashed his chances at getting the Republican nomination.

Trump, who leads his Republican challengers by a country mile, has made it clear he has no intention of dropping out of the race.

“I see no case in which I would do that,” Trump said in June during an appearance on a radio show hosted by political strategist Roger Stone, a longtime confidant. “I just wouldn't do it. I wouldn't do it. I had opportunities in 2016 to do it, and I didn't do it.”

But Allan Lichtman, a professor of history at American University, said campaigning for president and defending himself against criminal charges are two very different endeavors.

ALSO READ: A neuroscientist explains why certain Americans will never quit Trump no matter what the ex-president does

“He thinks he can win this case in the court of public opinion, but the truth is, Trump can huff, and Trump can puff, but he can't blow the courthouse down,” Lichtman said. “It’s a very, very different game once you enter a federal courthouse or a state courthouse. You can't just bluster. Anything that you present has to be proven, and you're subject to perjury.”

Still, Trump can continue to run his campaign while facing these charges — and he could even do so from prison in the event he were to be tried, convicted and sentenced before the 2024 election.

“Trump’s legal problems shouldn’t affect his campaign. Many of his supporters believe that he is being treated unfairly, and there is no prohibition against a defendant under indictment or even a convicted felon from serving as president,” said Neama Rahmani, a former assistant U.S. attorney and president of West Coast Trial Lawyers. “Theoretically, Trump could even be president while in prison.”

Indeed, the U.S. Constitution stipulates only that a presidential candidate be a natural-born citizen of the United States, be at least 35 years old and a U.S. resident for 14 years. Trump easily checks all those boxes. And congressional Democrats’ strongest efforts to potentially disqualify Trump from ever again seeking the presidency — convicting him following impeachment trials — failed.

So what would it take for Trump to run a presidential campaign — or govern the nation — from prison?

Raw Story interviewed historians, legal experts, political operatives and former government leaders who pieced together a playbook for how he could do it — and the peril that he’d face along the way as he attempts to defeat a field of GOP rivals ahead of a 2024 general election rematch with President Joe Biden.

Campaigning from a cell

Each of the charges Trump faces in the classified documents federal indictment carries maximum prison sentences between five and 20 years. Across all four indictments, potential prison time could span hundreds of years.

Being behind bars would, of course, prevent Trump from campaigning in his signature fashion: at big, rowdy MAGA rallies.

But Amani Wells-Onyioha, operations director at Democratic political firm Sole Strategies, envisions Trump still figuring out ways to communicate with potential voters.

“There's no doubt in my mind that he would have some recorded press from the little prison phone. There's no doubt in my mind that he would set up press opportunities whenever he's out on the yard getting his recreational use in, that there would be cameras there,” Wells-Onyioha said. “He would be using every opportunity to campaign. I don't see him stopping at all, and I only see him using this as fuel to make him go harder.”

Keeping up his Truth Social posts from prison might not be such a challenge for Trump, Wells-Onyioha said, as some jails and prisons might allow internet access.

“I do see him using the internet because that's all that he has, and he's great at that already,” Wells-Onyioha said. “He's a huge internet, TV personality type of guy, so it really would just force him to be in a position to do something that he's the best at, which is unfortunate for the country, but as far as he's concerned, I think he thinks that this is political gold for himself.”

Plus, Trump isn’t building a campaign from scratch. His 2024 presidential campaign is flush with staffers. He enjoys the support of super PACs, which may raise and spend unlimited amounts of money on his behalf to promote the former president and attack his opponents.

And few politicians are as good at Trump at presenting himself as a victim — he’s single-handedly vaulted the terms “witch hunt,” “deep state,” “hoax” and “fake news” into the contemporary political lexicon. As an inmate, Trump could become a martyr to the MAGA cause.

“You’re obviously handicapped to campaign, but in this electronic age, you can certainly campaign virtually, plus Trump's pretty well known. It’s not like he has to introduce himself to the American people,” Lichtman said.

If not prison, maybe jail

Former President Donald Trump arrives for his arraignment at Manhattan Criminal Court on April 04 in New York City. Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images

Although it seems unlikely Trump will be serving an active prison sentence before the 2024 election, it’s conceivable he could wind up in pretrial confinement of some sort while campaigning.

This, several legal experts said, will depend on Trump himself.

“He has to behave himself during a trial, and that's not beyond the realm of possibility that he'll act up, thinking that somehow he can win over the jury, but that would be a mistake,” said Kevin O’Brien, a former assistant U.S. attorney and partner at Ford O’Brien Landy LLP who specializes in white-collar criminal defense.

Brazenly defying a judge’s order or attempting to intimidate witnesses are among the more common ways a defendant can get himself thrown in jail or home confinement before or during his trial.

This isn’t merely conceptual, said Mike Lawlor, a criminal justice professor at the University of New Haven and former member of the Connecticut House of Representatives, who helped lead impeachment hearings against then-Gov. John Rowland, who ultimately pleaded guilty in federal court to political corruption.

ALSO READ: ‘Remember, Hitler went to prison’: moderate Republicans warn Trump prosecutors to ‘get this right’ or risk chaos

Lawlor expects delays in the federal trial — jury selection alone for a former president could prove a months-long headache — so he’s doubtful the trial will even have started by next year’s elections.

Still, knowing Trump’s penchant for cutting outbursts, Lawlor can envision a judge sanctioning Trump for defying directives. Trump will not only have one judge with whom to contend, but four or more, given the multiple legal actions against him.

“The opportunity to engage in contempt of court or witness tampering or obstruction of justice is fraught at this point. I’m not sure he has the self-control to keep himself from doing something that would get him confined pre-trial,” Lawlor said.

The U.S. House Jan. 6 select committee accused Trump of potential witness tampering, and Lawlor says he’s monitoring similar allegations here, especially because so many of the witnesses are GOP staffers of the former president.

“It’s so easy to imagine a situation where someone could be contacted and intimidated,” Lawlor said. “I think the temptation to do that for a guy like Trump is probably irresistible. I’m not sure his attorneys or the advisors he listens to can stop him from doing so. I don’t rule it out. As I said, it’s unlikely, but I can definitely see it happening.”

Using legal danger to fuel fundraising

The Trump campaign has wasted no time in exploiting the indictment to raise money, leaning into a familiar claim that the candidate is a victim of a Democratic witch hunt.

Only one day after news broke about Trump’s first federal indictment, a fundraising appeal built around the charges appeared on the campaign website prominently displayed in a column on the left-hand side of the page, suggesting contribution amounts ranging from $24 to $3,300. The message lays out a bill of particulars with the former president at the center of the persecution narrative, beginning with the apocalyptic opener: “We are watching our Republic DIE before our very eyes.”

Trump Save America, the beneficiary, is a joint fundraising committee for Donald J. Trump for President 2024 and the Save America PAC, which supports Trump.

The fundraising appeal contends that a “witch hunt began when the FBI RAIDED my home and then staged it to look like a made-for-TV crime scene with police sirens and flashing red and blue lights.”

Alluding to his previous indictment in New York state, the appeals continued: “So, after a state prosecutor failed to break us, the Deep State sharpened their attacks and unleashed a FEDERAL prosecutor to TRY and take us down.”

Notwithstanding Trump’s claim, the charges in New York state remain pending, and Smith, the special prosecutor appointed by U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland, was investigating Trump for allegedly mishandling classified documents four months before a grand jury in New Manhattan returned an indictment on the state charges related to the Stormy Daniels affair.

Minutes after the Aug. 1 indictment dropped, Trump started fundraising again, selling "I Stand With Trump" T-shirts featuring the indictment date, and Trump's mugshot from his booking at the Fulton County Jail helped him bring in more than $7 million after the Georgia indictment as he quickly took to selling mugs, shirts and other merchandise with the photo.

At least one prominent surrogate has helped retail the fundraising push.

Kari Lake, a fellow election denier who lost her race for governor of Arizona last year, joined a Twitter Spaces co-hosted by Dustin Stockton and Jennifer Lynn Lawrence on the night news broke about Trump’s indictment on charges of mishandling classified documents. Stockton and Lawrence helped organize the rally that provided the springboard for the Jan. 6 insurrection. During her appearance on Stockton and Lawrence’s Twitter Space, Lake told more than 1,300 listeners she had just gotten off the phone with Trump shortly after news broke about the indictment on June 8. Lake said it wasn’t enough for Republican voters to just say they stand with Trump or condemn the indictment.

“And if we really stand with him, we need to go to DonaldTrump.com and make a donation tonight,” said Lake, who is herself preparing a 2024 U.S. Senate run in Arizona. “Everybody, whether it’s $5, $10, $500 — whatever you can afford. Because if we’re gonna stand with him, we need to put our money where our mouth is tonight.”

The political monetization of Trump’s legal woes grows deeper by the month. Go to Trump’s campaign website and you’ll find several items on sale — a black-and-white ceramic coffee mug is $24 — featuring a fake mugshot of Trump above the words “NOT GUILTY”.

The Federal Election Commission, which enforces federal campaign finance laws, would have no grounds to intervene in Trump’s fundraising efforts while facing criminal charges or even time in jail or prison, said Ann Ravel, who served as an FEC commissioner from 2013 to 2017, including one year as the commission’s chairwoman.

Trump's campaign is selling these black-and-white ceramic coffee mugs for $24.

Trump’s campaign could easily continue sending supporters incessant fundraising emails and text messages in Trump’s name.

“The only problems for him would be if there's failure to disclose, or if people are giving more than the limits, all of the things that are traditional FEC issues, but they don't have the authority to do anything with regard to a person who's been indicted and is still fundraising,” Ravel said. “That in and of itself is not sufficient for the FEC to take any action.”

Lessons of Eugene Debs, incarcerated presidential candidate

Trump wouldn’t be the first candidate to run for president from prison if he were convicted.

In the weeks before the 1920 election, Eugene V. Debs, the Socialist Party candidate for president of the United States and an inmate in federal prison, touched on the significance of the moment.

“Has there ever been anything like it in American history before?” Debs said, as reported by the socialist newspaper Appeal to Reason. “Will there ever be anything like it in American history again? We must impress it upon the people that this scene is symbolic of what has befallen this country.”

There has been one other. Lyndon LaRouche, whom The New Republic called “The Godfather of Political Paranoia,” ran from prison in 1992 after being convicted of tax evasion and mail fraud.

His vice presidential running mate, the Rev. James Bevel, did most of the campaigning. This suggests that a jailed Trump could lean heavily on the presence of a charismatic vice presidential candidate — be it someone such as Lake of Arizona, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia or even banished Fox News host Tucker Carlson.

LaRouche received .02% of the popular vote — 26,334.

Debs, who was serving a 10-year sentence for decrying the United States’ involvement in World War I, received 3.4% of the popular vote — 919,799.

He received 6% of the vote as a candidate eight years earlier, in 1912.

While emphasizing that she’s speaking as an individual, Allison Duerk, director of the Eugene V. Debs Museum, located in Debs’ home in Terre Haute, Ind., said she cringes at comparisons between Debs and Trump. In material ways, the two men are polar opposites.

“I bristle at recent casual references to the 1920 campaign — not because they are inaccurate on the surface, but because these two men and their respective projects are diametrically opposed,” she told Raw Story.

Duerk does believe Debs predicted the emergence of American political leaders such as Trump.

Illustration of Eugene Debs while running for president in prison. Indiana State University archives

“Take this quote from the speech that got him locked up,” she said, quoting Debs: “‘In every age it has been the tyrant, the oppressor and the exploiter who has wrapped himself in the cloak of patriotism, or religion, or both to deceive and overawe the people.’"

In an Appeal to Reason article, Debs said he believed in change “but by perfectly peaceful and orderly means.” He added, “Never in my life have I broken a law or advised others to do so.”

Unlike Trump, who nurses grievances daily, the article said of Debs, “Nothing embitters him. Injustice, oppression, persecution, savagery do not embitter him. It is a stirring, an uplifting thing to find a man who has suffered so much and remains so ardent and so pure.”

The U.S. government and the prison warden made small accommodations to Debs’ candidacy. He was, for one, allowed a single written message per week to voters.

“Where Debs had once stormed the country in a verbal torrent,” wrote Ernest Freeberg, author of Democracy’s Prisoner, “he would now have five hundred words a week.”

Debs still had some of the trappings of a political campaign, including a button that had his photo from prison with the words, “For President - Convict No. 9653.” He had printed material that said, “From Atlanta to the White House, 1920,” a reference to his residency inside the Atlanta Federal Penitentiary.

On election night, Debs received the results in the warden’s office and soon conceded the election to President-elect Warren Harding.

In his book Walls and Bars, Debs wrote that the question came up in the room about his potential ability to pardon himself as president — an action over which Trump has reportedly mused.

“We all found some mirth in debating it,” Debs wrote.

Serving as president from prison

If Trump ran a successful campaign from jail or prison, is there anything stopping him from assuming the Oval Office if he were elected president?

“There is nothing in our traditions or the Constitution that prevents someone who is indicted or convicted or, in fact, serving in jail, from also serving as the president,” said Harold Krent, law professor at the Chicago-Kent College of Law, who formerly worked for the Department of Justice. “Does it make any sense? No. But there is no Constitutional disablement from that happening. So, you could think of a scenario in which the case goes to trial, maybe after the primary and results in a prison time with President Trump and then he is inaugurated, and he gets to serve as president from some prison farm somewhere.”

Lichtman said “of course” Trump would just pardon himself of any federal crimes were he reelected president. There’s also the possibility of Trump attempting to preemptively pardon himself, with then-President Gerald Ford’s pardoning of Richard Nixon serving as an imperfect template.

But if Trump is convicted on any state-level charges, where federal pardons do not apply, that’s a different story.

“That's unprecedented, but the pardon power is pretty absolute,” Lichtman. “He can’t pardon himself for the New York case because that’s a state case. If he's convicted in New York, he's stuck. If ... he's convicted in Georgia, he can’t pardon himself from that either, because that's also a state case.”

Trump’s ability to pardon himself is widely debated in the academic community, Krent said.

Federal document listing indictment counts against former President Donald Trump. U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida

“There's no law on the books that says you can't. You just have to reason from the idea of separation of powers and the Constitution or to think that it doesn't make any sense to have one person aggregate or accumulate so much power,” Krent said. “As a constitutional matter, I think that that would be too much of a conflict of interest to be able to pardon yourself.”

Interestingly, the classified documents federal indictment didn’t include counts related to 18 U.S.Code 2071, which deals with the concealment, removal or destruction of government documents. This would disqualify anyone found in violation of the code from running for office, Rahmani said.

“That particular provision was passed after Nixon as a disqualification provision that prevents anyone convicted of it from holding public office,” Rahmani said. “Trump's lawyers would have said that it's unconstitutional because only the Constitution can place limits on who could be president. You can be a felon. You can be in prison and still theoretically be president of the United States.”

The Constitution could be interpreted — ostensibly by the U.S. Supreme Court — that an imprisoned president wouldn’t qualify as capable of carrying out his duties, preventing him from taking the office, Ravel said.

“There's nothing to stop him from becoming president either because the provisions in the Constitution about the presidency and the requirements for presidency don't reflect any concern if a president has been indicted or is in jail,” Ravel said. “Although if he goes to jail, it would create a problem for him because the Constitution does have concerns about the inability to carry out the obligations of the office, which he certainly wouldn't be able to do in jail.”

Specifically, Section 4 of the Constitution’s 25th Amendment potentially empowers Congress to determine — via a two-thirds vote of both chambers — that a president is “unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office” and thereby transfer presidential powers to the vice president.

But if Trump is elected next year, and a Trump trial takes place after November 2024, some of his legal peril could subside — at least at the federal level.

“There's clear Department of Justice memos and policies. It's pretty clear that a sitting president cannot be prosecuted,” Rahmani said.

If Trump won and was convicted but on appeal, he would “probably” still be able to get inaugurated, Krent said.

“The question is whether they would stop the appeal and let him serve out the presidency before it would continue,” Krent said. “Uncharted waters in terms of how this would go. It's gonna affect the primary. It would affect the general election, and it certainly would affect his ability to conduct a presidency.”

Editor’s note: This article was originally published on June 13, 2023, and has been updated to reflect additional indictments Trump faces and related political developments.

For customer support contact support@rawstory.com. Report typos and corrections to corrections@rawstory.com.

A new White House hire of a controversial former Donald Trump adviser could land Chief of Staff Susie Wiles in court.

On Monday, a report claimed the White House is in talks to bring Jason Miller, long associated with the president since his first term, back to help with communications issues before the midterm elections. That potential hiring did not go unnoticed by Miller’s former girlfriend A. J. Delgado who has been waging a war with him for years over child support.

Delgado, a former Trump 2016 campaign aide, immediately questioned the hiring decision, with a flood of posts on X, including notifying Wiles she can expect to hear from the court that is hearing her lawsuit aimed at Miller.

In previous public statements, Delgado has alleged that Miller engaged in "a cycle of sexual coercion, rape, sexual assault, abuse, battery, sexual harassment, and sex trafficking." The accusations carry substantial weight given her proximity to Trump's inner circle and her detailed familiarity with Miller's behavior.

Beyond the assault allegations, Delgado has characterized Miller as deliberately evading child support obligations—a pattern that extends back years and now faces fresh scrutiny as Miller assumes a prominent White House role.

Following the new hiring announcement, she wrote on X, "30 days out from a child support trial, Jason Miller suddenly joins the White House (salary of $195,000), when he earned $14 million in the past 12 months. Nothing to see here. Just a 98% reduction in income. Wink-wink. The timing is a total coincidence, am sure."

She added, "Hi @SusieWiles47 , I'm moving the court to allow me to take your deposition. Am curious when/why this decision to hire (disgraced) Miller was made, reducing Miller's income by 98%... quite conveniently, a mere 30 days out from my son's long-awaited child support trial..."

THANKS FOR SUBSCRIBING! ALL ADS REMOVED!

The Supreme Court handed President Donald Trump another victory Monday by expanding his authority to fire heads of independent agencies, a decision that Zeteo’s Andrew Perez argued was just the latest example of the court’s “far-right justices” executing a long sought-after plan.

“Fundamentally, Trump and the justices are partners in fascism,” Perez wrote in an analysis published in Zeteo Tuesday. “With teamwork, a handful of elite, unelected far-right operatives and a narcissistic game-show host can take apart American liberal democracy piece by piece, and replace it with authoritarian rule.”

The Supreme Court has handed Trump a number of unprecedented victories in recent years, chief among them its ruling that granted the president “absolute immunity from criminal prosecution” for “official acts,” a decision that killed the criminal case against him over his efforts to overturn the 2020 election results.

Despite the Supreme Court handing Trump win after win – with some exceptions, notably when Trump’s interests conflicted with those of the uber-wealthy – some of its justices “almost certainly can’t stand the man,” Perez argued.

“They want this monstrous man to be king,” Perez wrote. “This is not something you’ll hear every day in the mainstream media, but it’s precisely why the right-wing justices, three of whom Trump appointed, have repeatedly granted this president king-like powers – even though they surely know he is out of his mind.”

Amid the Supreme Court’s embrace of Trump and his novel legal theories, its favorability among Americans has plummeted. A recent Pew Research survey found a 22-percentage point drop in favorability for the court among Americans between 2020 and 2025, with a growing number of Democrats continuing calls for the court to be reformed.

In the midst of its newfound unpopularity, the Supreme Court has moved – quietly – to double its own personal police force in a move that has frustrated lawmakers.

“The far-right justices want a king – through whom they can rule over us,” Perez wrote.

You can hear the whispering in the White House across the Mall from the Smithsonian Aviation Museum, "Well, that didn't work, and that's bad — really bad." They're talking about the "Great American State Fair."

Aaron Rupar, the Left's irreplaceable and most deeply embedded intel agent, captured Fox News's inability to paper over a debacle devoid of people.

Did the rapture happen overnight? Fox & Friends is broadcasting from a completely empty Trump state fair on the National Mall.

There seems to be little risk in ruling out the rapture as an explanation. After all, we're still here, and if one actually reads the Gospels, whether you consider those words divine or secular, the message marks Jesus as history's most influential progressive, and thus liberals who follow Jesus's real message sit firmly ensconced pretty much anywhere but the Great American State Fair.

To be fair, no one's followers bothered to show up, either, and that's both good and bad. Certainly more good than bad, but still...

This week marks this nation's 250th birthday, a date which any self-respecting nation should find notable enough to stand somewhat proud — or if not proud, a nation populated by committed citizens, people with at least interest or agency. And there's our first clue to the problem, the "self-respecting nation" part.

Most liberals believe that the Trump regime exists, at least in large part, to block us from respecting what remains "our" country. No shame in that, he does call us the nation's biggest "enemies." It would be bizarre to feel warm loyalty to a country whose leader labels you not just an outsider, but an outsider for whom he has plans, dark plans

More interestingly, it looks undeniable that even MAGA has lost respect for the country under Trump.

Interesting. They are the ones who use "MAGA" interchangeably with "Patriot." It is probably even more important to note that, while the stereotypical liberal enjoys workshopping their latest novel at an effete coffee shop, or attending a MOMA somewhere, not even MAGAs will deny that they were born to attend a good fair, with a rodeo, country or gospel music, those corny games that promise stuffed animals bigger than your date, and a good elephant ear. (Stop here for a moment. Once a decade, a good elephant ear is really, really good. Liberalism can also be practical, and coffee is only coffee, whereas an elephant ear...)

And yet the MAGAs born to be there didn't show up, either. So what's up?

First, the practical — very practical. There are fewer and fewer Americans who can travel nationally to attend an actual State fair, never mind travel to one of America's most expensive cities to enjoy a "National Fair." Survey after survey shows that Americans' primary concern is "affordability," and thus likely plan to spend less money even at the county fair. So the price of literally everything, from gas to food, is likely holding a lot of people back.

But let's get to the reason behind those White House whispers.

Like anything else undertaken by the federal government under this regime, Trump himself stamped personal ownership on this event. Up to this point in history, Trump affiliation alone — a fair masquerading as a rally — would motivate many MAGAs to sacrifice the prices and show their support. And yet, not only are they not showing up, but the White House likely senses this may be less about "affordability" and more about "affiliation." It has been a long time since Trump has had a clear win, polling is way down, and he seems doomed to some clear losses in the near future. Everyone, even MAGAs — maybe especially MAGAs — are weary of close association with a clear loser.

It might go even deeper. It might well be that even MAGA has its limits as to what it will let Trump personally claim. Perhaps they will even allow him to "own" Air Force One, but maybe not personally own what should have been "our" birthday. The cynics commenting below will say, "No chance, MAGA has no limit..." and they will be right describing some MAGAs. But even MAGA voters' values still lie on a spectrum, and the evidence in front of our faces demands explanations.

Rejecting Trump affiliation might be explanation number one. Which doesn't mean liberals won.

This column spent much of the late spring warning about a hot summer burning with unrest, possible real clashes between protesters and law enforcement, violence, which would do nothing but play directly into Trump's hands. So far, we've seen almost none of it, thankfully. But it might have been good to see the National Fair surrounded by protesters, reminding everyone that the country used to be at least "more" fair, even while admitting it's never been close to fair for all. But even that hasn't happened.

Right now, it's hard to escape the sense that the issue could be that the subject is "America." Most Americans are just too tired to give a s--t. If Trump and MAGA are nothing else, they're exhausting, and perhaps, they, too, are exhausted.

Now, that's really, really bad news for a White House that exists only upon the premise that enough Trump followers care so much about him that their loyalty and protection remain non-negotiable: from stealing 747s to Trump actively resisting investigating Epstein, all but forcing even his supporters to admit, "It sure looks like the guy doesn't want anyone to know what happened back then." There is no Trump regime without "Trumpers."

Fine, but, never mind back then, Trump still needs protection in the here and now, and on a lot more issues than just Epstein and personal planes, or what happened on Epstein's personal plane, and if the White House senses that his followers are distancing themselves from him, such as not attending what was a "personal rally" in the form of a national fair, that has to constitute not a "huge" worry, but "the" worry.

And yet, that only means that Democrats should care now more than ever, now sailing with the wind, finally, a chance to hand Trump an anchor. Granted, Democratic inaction is harder to read than MAGA motivation, but it still sits out there as a possible concern.

The United States needs intense, invested, and imaginative changes. Right now, the country sails almost rudderless as Trump and his gang enrich themselves; MAGA voters definitely have plans to make things worse. But if we can be sure of anything, it is that any real change requires a lot of people to really care. They will, if pressed. But Dems? Dem leaders?

You care.

You wouldn't be reading this if you didn't. Can we be sure enough of us care, or — worse yet — can we be sure that our leaders care? Hakeem Jeffries is not standing on a podium just outside the Mall speaking in front of 50,000 people about making America itself "more fair."

That seems a bit "off."

It sure looks like Trump's voters care less and less, preferring to keep their distance while saving some money. And that has to scare the sh... spit out of the White House, which cares dearly about one thing — saving dear leader. You can be damn sure that the more distance MAGA voters put between them and him, the more willingly Trump makes fast changes of the most horrific type, the type that doesn't so much ruin a celebration as negate it.

But have no doubt, the Mall remains empty, and it's empty for reasons important to both sides. Whatever those reasons might be, none are good for the White House. It doesn't take an elephant ear to hear the whispers.

"This sucks."

They don't even know how right they are.

Jason Miciak is a Rawstory Columnist, former editor of Occupy Democrats, political consultant, author, attorney, and single girldad. Please follow him on Bluesky, and he can be reached at jasonmiciak@gmail.com. He does read and respond to comments and appreciates just how much can be learned in doing so.

{{ post.roar_specific_data.api_data.analytics }}