Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Grand jury votes to indict Donald Trump

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 1001 posts

Re: Grand jury votes to indict Donald Trump

#361

Post by jhanschoo »

photochemsyn wrote: post #67

I think it sets a good precedent. If indicting past presidents (and vice presidents) for crimes committed while in office (or while running for office), well, the courts are going to be busy on this front for years to come. Bush and Cheney are certainly candidates, r.e. those "Saddam has an active WMD program" claims. The list could be expanded to include charges related to the unConstitutional domestic spying progra…

I don't think anything in this particular battle concerns anything he did in an official capacity while in office.

Re: Grand jury votes to indict Donald Trump

#362

Post by behringer »

MuffinFlavored wrote: post #248
behringer wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why did they only get capone on tax evasion?

Think about how much investigations through government agencies have changed since 1930?

Considering we still regularly still do lie detector tests, dog searches, entrapments, confessions under duress or even torture, I would say we haven't changed as much as you think.

Re: Grand jury votes to indict Donald Trump

#363

Post by unethical_ban »

robomartin wrote: post #263
unethical_ban wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Last line: >don't take sides First line: >This has the makings of a Liberal (capital L, sic) pileup Any criticism or callout of your factual or logical fallacies will only reinforce your conspiratorial mindset. Since there aren't any "facts" to debate in your post, I'll just say you're wrong and move on.

[flagged]

There is a part of me that wonders how wise this is, not because Trump doesn't deserve it, but because Republicans will do the "my turn" and try to witch-hunt every opponent, even moderate Republicans, who they don't like.

Donald Trump is a criminal, and his crimes against this country were well documented in two impeachments. I agree that having "only" a tax fraud prostitution coverup is not ideal. Unfortunately, the Republicans in the Senate proved how disloyal they are to this country, twice, when they had to choose between retaining their psychotic base and doing what is right for the country.

There is very little reputable right-wing sources of news, by the way. WaPo, maybe WSJ non-opinion section. Fox is not news.

What's the option? Straight-up not prosecute anyone who pays enough to run for president every four years, no matter their prospective crimes?

Re: Grand jury votes to indict Donald Trump

#364

Post by michaelbarton »

zarzavat wrote: post #318
fsckboy wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Nearly the entire point of the United States at its founding was that the law should apply to political leaders. I think that's overstated. First of all, it was the Magna Carta which established that the king was not above the law, so in that sense the founding of the United States was more "and we don't need a king". Second, there are frequently legal discussions in the present day as to whether a sitting presiden…

Just to clarify. The King of the UK is above criminal law. The monarch of the UK cannot be arrested or charged with an offence, or be personally involved in criminal proceedings. That is similar to the immunity given to the sitting US President. What is different is that monarch is not really expected to obey the law either. For example, the Prime Minister was fined for illegally not wearing a seatbelt. If the king d…

All good points. A small note though I believe the Queen started paying taxes in exchange for the state’s help rebuilding Windsor caste after the 92 fire. So seems more quid pro quo than something she felt was the right thing to do.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992_Windsor_Castle_fire

Re: Grand jury votes to indict Donald Trump

#365

Post by hrunt »

xpe wrote: post #345
richk449 wrote: post #338

Biden pardons Trump. Outrage mitigated. Base can’t rage. Biden easily wins re-election.

Perhaps. There would also be justifiable outrage by reasonable people. Pardoning Trump would continue the example set by Gerald Ford in pardoning Nixon. "Helping the country heal" seems hollow to me. To use a few metaphors: 1. Physical healing can't properly happen until the foreign object is cleared and infection removed from the body. 2. Mental healing doesn't fully happen until person comes to terms with what's ha…

Trump and Nixon are also two very different situations. When Ford pardoned Nixon, Nixon was done with politics. He had no chance of coming back as a politician. If he had not resigned, he was going to be impeached and he was going to be removed from office. There was bipartisan support for his removal. Ford spent his political capital to pardon Nixon and heal the nation, but he also knew that Nixon would not be a factor going forward.

The same is not true for Trump today. Even if Biden pardoned Trump, establishment politics would continue to have to deal with him moving forward. He has shown no indication that he would stop attacking everything around him.

Re: Grand jury votes to indict Donald Trump

#366

Post by meragrin_ »

dukeofdoom wrote: post #264

Judging comments from republicans on Twitter "this is a political prosecution, from a biased Soros backed prosecutor" Selective prosecution to try to sway an election was rejected once by voters after when Bill Clinton was impeached for his affair. So this will not directly boost Democrat's chances, might even make Donald a martyr. But would make sense if the strategy was to split the vote on the right. Trump being i…

> Bill Clinton was impeached for his affair.

He was impeached for lying about the affair in a legal setting and not for the affair itself.

Re: Grand jury votes to indict Donald Trump

#367

Post by stuckinhell »

djha-skin wrote: post #241
poulsbohemian wrote: post #167

I know it is campaign finance fraud that is the actual charge, but that fact that of all the possible things they could have charged him with, it's something tied to a sexual act feels so both disappointing and so American. It's likely they can actually get a conviction, so I guess there's that. You can already assume right-wing media will spin this into "Really? All you could get him for was a BJ?" Feels a bit like…

I don't know. It feels a lot like the indictment of Al Capone. His lawyers were always concentrating on the big picture but they ignored the small stuff and the government was able to catch him on tax evasion. Getting indictment of any sort can lead to larger ones.

I see this alot. Donald Trump isn't Al Capone,and the analogy fails enormously. Donald Trump is a former president of the United States. He's beloved by his base in quasi-religious way, even across the globe. Italy had parade with a "God-emperor Trump".

Trump cannot be treated with like Al Capone. He has run as the anti-establishment candidate, and by god you better have a bulletproof case on him or you have just angered millions of people.

He literally won half the country, his rallies ALWAYS have huge turnsouts. This guy is a Napoleon or Caesar in the making, and New York has just given him something to boost his profile when it was failing against Desantis.

Donald Trump isn't Al Capone, that analogy does them both a disservice and distorts reality.

Donald Trump was literally president of the united states for 4 years, any prosecution has to be air fucking tight or the whole system collapses.

Re: Grand jury votes to indict Donald Trump

#369

Post by stuckinhell »

talkingtab wrote: post #185

We are a people who have decided to be governed by laws rather than kings, or religions or dictators or putins. The laws applies to all the people equally. Everyone is entitled to a jury. A jury of peers decides. That is who we are. That is what a democracy is.

Half the country thought Hillary Clinton should be arrested for emails. Not a good metric.

Re: Grand jury votes to indict Donald Trump

#370

Post by scruple »

poulsbohemian wrote: post #167

I know it is campaign finance fraud that is the actual charge, but that fact that of all the possible things they could have charged him with, it's something tied to a sexual act feels so both disappointing and so American. It's likely they can actually get a conviction, so I guess there's that. You can already assume right-wing media will spin this into "Really? All you could get him for was a BJ?" Feels a bit like…

If I squint my eyes it looks like the sex stuff is being dragged into the sunlight to get a big part of his base (the loud Christian one that outwardly claims they're aghast at infidelity) to reconsider their allegiances.
Post reply on HN