The cases against him are obvious hokum, but since when has that mattered? If the government wants to destroy you, it will succeed. Now, if you're lucky, rich and young - you might be able to spend 20 years trying to clear you name, and then (and even that has only occurred in non-political cases) belatedly succeed. Trump does not have that sort of time - he's old and morbidly obese.
There is a second cope that people will see through the fact that these cases are hokum - as little as that would help him. While that is not impossible (and Trump has defied political gravity many times before), there is an equal - if not greater - possibility that enough people will be swayed by the indictments against him. "I'm voting for the guy who doesn't have 79 indictments against him" is a reasonable statement if you live in a country with a rule of law and isonomia, which many people imagine they live in.
There is a silver lining. The first generation of reformer never succeeds - think the Gracchi brothers - and often comes to grief. The regime has here put itself in a lose-lose position. Imagine if they get what they want, and Trump is convicted and is sent to prison until he dies. They still lose, because they lose the fig-leaf of republican legitimacy, and had to behave in openly banana republican ways - permanently alienating the 30-40% of die-hard Trump supporters. It does not matter, you say, but it does - that's why both the regime and even openly autocratic states try to retain legitimacy for their power and their elections.
If they lose, and Trump is re-elected, it's more obvious why they will lose. This is a man they could have easily won over with a little bit of flattery and just by not being obnoxious (cf. Lindsey Graham and Mike Pompeo). Instead, they have made him lust for their blood, and God help them if he ever is re-elected. Here too they are in a lose-lose - either he will use the powers of the presidency to crush them, or the impotence of the presidency itself will be exposed. Both rather undesirable situations for the regime. Which is why I think they've gone to such desperate measures, and may even resort to assassination as happened to the Gracchi - and they'd get the same result in sowing the seeds of their own destruction just as the Optimates did.
None of this is to suggest "giving up", because I think everyone has an obligation to fight for what is right regardless of the circumstances.
If the Second Amendment was a realistic response to tyranny, it would have been used by now.
It's been said before, and better, but it bears repeating:
For the American Left, violence is analog. Dial it up a little bit, throw some bricks, light some fires, get your way, calm back down.
For the American Right, violence is binary. The switch has two positions: off, and kill your enemies.
This creates a high bar for the use of force, because there's a significant gulf between "try to vote better candidates in to represent your interest" and "hit the reset button with lethal force". There's no way to put just one foot on that second road. If you're going to walk it, it has to be with a clear head and a purpose.
I hope we can turn things around before we do reach that point, but the Left seems quite convinced they can white-knuckle it until the last person who opposes their anti-human regime has died of old age or been cowed into submission.
The thing about the right to keep and bear arms is that people, especially tyrants, forget what it means to attempt to rule an armed citizenry if there has not been a recent reminder.
Not endorsing violence in any way, but it seems to me that the low-level violence that the left uses is very effective. Hell, you can be very effective without using violence. Picket the local Target, and make shopping there unpleasant for people, and you'll get a long way.
That said, it seems to only be the case because the corrupt ruling class is on its side. The folks on January 6 thought they could throw in a few windows because BLM had burned people alive, and it turns out that they will throw you in prison if they do not like you.
I think it's a mistake to think this is about the 'Left'. It's not really just the left - which doesn't hold any real power. Which leftist ideas do the weapons makers endorse? Sure, the identity stuff that doesn't get in the way of their wars.
The Left and the Corporatocracy are in a coalition, and the political establishment is their priesthood. They may not own the power, but they are permitted to wield it all the same, because they are ideologically captured by the power structure.