politics

No, Nixon stepped down because of Watergate, you won't see similar honesty from Republicans today.
They are exploiting the judicial system, and to Prosecute Trump for things he did in the open as president to enrich himself and his family isn't pursued, even now after 8 years.
After Nixon the Republicans decided to try to control the courts and the political narrative, so they never would lose a case either legally or in the public eye like Watergate again.
Republicans have been systematically undermining USA for 5 decades now.

It's way past the time to stop it, If Harris doesn't win, and start the process towards legal and political normalcy, it could easily be to late.

Except that he's explicitly choosing to be a political candidate for the purpose of avoiding the lawsuits. A lot of these allegations occurred before he announced he was re-running, and then the lawsuits got put on hold.

Your scenario creates a method for anyone to delay consequences by running for office. Although we both know it wouldn't really work for anyone. Trump gets his special treatment.

No that's a false narrative, the criminal cases are based on public prosecutors running them.
What you are claiming is for civil suits, of which a couple have been settled, despite obstruction attempts by Trump.
If it gets to a point where a politician can ask public prosecutors to put opponents in jail, USA has long ceased to be a democracy.

Trump is already a convicted criminal, and cannot vote in several states, still he can run for president, and enjoy privileged treatment.
Where an ordinary person voting because she was told she could, got 5 years prison for voter fraud!

In your scenario, do you imagine that all the Trump-appointed prosecutors and the Trump-appointed judges will willingly delay the cases of Trump's "enemies of the state" until after the election out of some respect for the sanctity of the democratic process?

It is a horrible, dangerous precedent to say we can't justly hold the guilty accountable because some bad actor in the future may unjustly hold the innocent accountable.

I understand your viewpoint, but disagree.

By that argument any criminal ever could argue against prosecution because they intend to run for a public office. Ridiculous exaggeration of course, but if Trump gets this chance, everyone else should too.

Well, if the voting public has ultimate say than why are there rules on who can become president in the first place?

While you make a point to consider, an educated and informed electorate is bedrock to a democracy.

Maybe the results of the Discovery process should be public record before a vote.

Another way of saying the same thing, is that if the Voting Public want’s

If winning the vote entailed an actual public majority, you might have some argument there. But that's not what we have.

Well that's something I suppose.