So the Orange One — who, one might note, is under indictment concerning a scheme to inflate his net worth to get more-favorable loan terms for real-property development that removed property from general usability — is whingeing about the high costs of his legal fees. And that's without acknowledging silly things like civil defamation lawsuits (especially when he was the accuser!) and payoffs to porn stars. Of course, there's an extraordinarily simple solution to this, given that he's now had five (including the two impeachments) going on six criminal indictments, and more civil matters regarding his peckeradillos and fraud recharacterized as "mere" false advertising: Admit you're a crook, a sleazebucket of the highest (lowest?) order, and plead guilty. That at least limits the legal fees to representation at sentencing.
And the bonus is that by doing so, it cuts off other avenues for investigation that might result in more-significant forfeiture of that "massive," "yuuuge" fortune. Frankly, it would be really entertaining to see the wrangling over statutes of limitations, extending back at least to July 1982… but then, I'm a procedure nerd and have a really, really sick sense of humor. Maybe it would eventually lead to a classic film (preceded by a novel currently available only in overpriced editions that are not being accounted for properly, so go to the library) about an(other) American not nearly as great, or smart, or even merely clever bearing considerable watching, as his self-image. (Nor was the author, but that's for another time.)
But it's not going to happen. A guilty plea requires a knowing and voluntary admission of responsibility, and the Orange One has never been responsible for anything with adverse consequences in his lifetime. Just ask him! Further, a federal judge should probably not accept such a plea (I'm not familiar enough with judicial guidelines in New York and/or Georgia concerning guilty pleas to comment, but suspect they're rather similar). Leaving aside any raised eyebrows concerning tactical guilty pleas entered to limit consequences and cut off further inquiries — <SARCASM> I couldn't possibly have any knowledge or even credible suspicions of that ever occuring regarding defense contracting or consumer finance or the entertainment industry, let alone in politics </SARCASM> — a judge must affirmatively ensure that a guilty plea is knowing, voluntary, consistent with the known facts, and above all competent. At minimum, there are a recorded phone call and a book by a mental-health professional of which any judge evaluating a potential guilty plea by this… defendant… would be pretty much obligated to take judicial notice — at least to the extent of ordering an independent evaluation.
At present, though, the Orange One is maintaining a substantial lead in the early Heffalump polls. Those of us who were, ya know, paying attention 45 years ago (yeah, I'm old) can see some disturbing echoes of the past. This time, it's not just one "village" at stake, to be destroyed in order to save it.