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

511–520 of 1001 posts

Re: Grand jury votes to indict Donald Trump

#511

Post by drusepth »

Mavvie wrote: post #434
sashank_1509 wrote: post #199

Alright let me make the argument why indicting Trump is a horrible idea. It's really not hard to see why, if you have any insight into what the other side thinks: 1. First there are two alternative realities being played in real time in US: This arguably is the first time this has happened in US history (maybe civil war was another time) but two populations have become so isolated that they essentially live in 2 diff…

> please quiz yourself what worldview would brag about being hated by UN. If you cant understand, you literally can't understand anything about ~48% of the country For a non-American, could someone kindly explain what worldview would brag about being hated by UN?

An intersection of nationalists + anti-globalists looking to shirk the rest of the world might brag about being hated by the UN as a way to imply, "We're so important/powerful/rich/cultured/etc, no other country [or their opinions of us] even matters."

As the kids once said, "They hate us 'cause they ain't us."

Re: Grand jury votes to indict Donald Trump

#512

Post by brewdad »

ncallaway wrote: post #420
marcell wrote: post #389

I've scrolled through the top ~10 or so comments, and none of them, describe or comment on the nature of the charges against Trump. To be fair to the commenters, most stories are vague. The charges relate to hush money payments to Stormy Daniels, but hush money is not a crime. It's also not a crime to have an affair with Stormy Daniels. So the most salacious parts of the story are not what the crime is. My understand…

> describe or comment on the nature of the charges against Trump. To be fair to the commenters, most stories are vague. That's because the charges haven't been announced yet. The facts that we know are that a grand jury has voted to indict Donald Trump and has delivered a True Bill to the prosecutors. The indictment is at this moment sealed. It should be unsealed shortly (speculation was a timeline of tonight/tomorro…

Seriously. At this point we don't know whether Trump is being indicted on a minor campaign violation or for running a child sex ring and hiding bodies under the 17th green of Trump National.

Logic and the rumor mill suggest it's far closer to the former but until the indictment is unsealed we are all going to have to wait and see.

The 24 hour news cycle can't handle that vacuum but that's their problem.

Re: Grand jury votes to indict Donald Trump

#513

Post by claytongulick »

jshen wrote: post #422
stuckinhell wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because Trump has nearly religious following that scares many many people on the left and right. They will do ANYTHING to stop him out of fear, anger, arrogance etc. The problem here is Trump is an expert at reflection. This HAS ALREADY empowered his base, and strengthened Ron Desantis. I think the hardest part to accept is nearly half the nation DOES NOT AGREE with progressive principles at their very core.

The democratic nominee for President has won the popular vote in something like 7 of the last 8 presidential elections. A majority of Americans do have progressive principles, but America is a minority rule country at the moment.

Playing with numbers is fun!

I'll do it too:

Republicans have won 8 out of the past 14 elections, and won the popular vote as well as the electoral college in six out of eight [1].

Or, looking at it another way, of the past 14 elections, republicans won the popular vote by an average of 7.42%, while democrats only won by 5.28%, which if you took that pointless cherry picked data seriously could convince you that on average republican candidates are significantly more popular than democrats.

The fact is, this country is split fairly evenly along the nonsensical left/right axis.

A more interesting evaluation would be along the authoritarian vs antiauthoritarian axis. I think a much larger percentage of Americans fall along the antiauthoritarian axis, and that the noise in the left/right false dichotomy is a result of that more than anything.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_presid...

Re: Grand jury votes to indict Donald Trump

#514

Post by a-user-you-like »

a-user-you-like wrote: post #456
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…

Yes, for WMD, president Obama for weaponizing the IRS. Both ought to be brought to trial.

Someone either doesn’t like bush or Obama hah

Re: Grand jury votes to indict Donald Trump

#516

Post by janalsncm »

another_story wrote: post #399
zarzavat wrote: post #346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let he who is without sin throw the first stone. Should Joe Biden be prosecuted for negligently storing classified documents in his home? Every person in the US is guilty of some baseline level of criminality, and the more “interesting” your life, the more crimes you are likely to have committed. If the US wants to have non-criminal presidents then it should reform its vast state and federal criminal codes so that su…

Yes, if you commit a crime, petty or not, rich or poor, you should face a court. If you park in front of a fire hydrant, whether you're a mom picking up her kid or the president, you should get a ticket. If there is no attempt at equality in the face of the law, then what's the point?

There’s a strong argument that regulations and punishment should be increased with power and authority. Those who are in power should behave exceptionally well.

When I worked for a bank we had to undergo quarterly insider trading training. When we were and weren’t allowed to trade stock, should we come into possession of material information. Of course that kind of stuff was way above my pay grade, but we were instructed to avoid even the appearance of impropriety.

And yet Congress is allowed to day trade during classified hearings.

Re: Grand jury votes to indict Donald Trump

#517

Post by drusepth »

zarzavat wrote: post #346
djha-skin wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand your point and understanding both sides of the country is very important, but so also is justice. I mean, what if he is guilty? If 48% of the population is ticked off by a guilty conviction that theoretically could be correct, that shouldn't stop us from convicting a criminal. I'm not saying Trump is a criminal; I am not on the jury and do not have the facts. But I'm saying someone should be convicted if…

Let he who is without sin throw the first stone. Should Joe Biden be prosecuted for negligently storing classified documents in his home? Every person in the US is guilty of some baseline level of criminality, and the more “interesting” your life, the more crimes you are likely to have committed. If the US wants to have non-criminal presidents then it should reform its vast state and federal criminal codes so that su…

> Every person in the US is guilty of some baseline level of criminality, and the more “interesting” your life, the more crimes you are likely to have committed.

What's the point of having these laws if they're not enforced?

Yes, yes, and yes. Every little legal infraction should be prosecuted, no matter how small or who you are. If they don't matter or shouldn't matter, the law should be changed; keeping them on the books and selectively enforcing them when it's convenient isn't fair to anyone.

Re: Grand jury votes to indict Donald Trump

#518

Post by logicchains »

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…

[flagged]

Re: Grand jury votes to indict Donald Trump

#519

Post by janalsncm »

notch898a wrote: post #453
laidoffamazon wrote: post #439

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The most criminal president in history is Trump by virtue of two impeachments, with one getting huge crossover support.

devils advocate: Or you could say the most vindicated.... impeached twice but never convicted.

Not being convicted by your own party is a pretty low bar to pass.

Re: Grand jury votes to indict Donald Trump

#520

Post by brewdad »

jameshart wrote: post #412
zarzavat wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

On the flip side... England did actually arrest, try and convict the King once. Also did the same to an ex-queen, in Lady Jane Grey. After first having un-queened her, which is also a thing that cannot be done . The thing about Britain's constitutional arrangements is that there are many things which 'can't' be done, which it turns out simply 'aren't' done.

So very similar to the US then. It's not that an incoming Governor of the opposition party can't be stripped of executive power it's just that no one had done it until recently.
Post reply on HN