Live data from Hacker News

Grand jury votes to indict Donald Trump

nytimes.com

71–80 of 1001 posts

Re: Grand jury votes to indict Donald Trump

#71

Nearly the entire point of the United States at its founding was that the law should apply to political leaders. We are overdue for setting the precedent of a former President being charged with a crime, and we ought to go back and charge a few other former Presidents with crimes while we’re at it.

Meanwhile, adjacent to presidents, Henry Kissinger remains both alive and not charged in any international criminal courts. I think he's literally 99 years old now.

Re: Grand jury votes to indict Donald Trump

#72
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you mean? He's a real lawyer and law professor. I haven't heard of any of these criticisms. edit: I can't reply, so... Specific criticisms, please? The link is to a video with a Canadian lawyer and someone who might actually have a relevant opinion on US law who, several minutes in, can only seem to broadly and mockingly dismiss him without saying anything specific other than accuse him of being biased and mo…

Here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5_hVrfBjRs&t=3456s

Wow, just by the number of seconds into that video (knowing 3600 is an hour), that seems like quite the rabbit hole to go down.

Re: Grand jury votes to indict Donald Trump

#73

Nearly the entire point of the United States at its founding was that the law should apply to political leaders. We are overdue for setting the precedent of a former President being charged with a crime, and we ought to go back and charge a few other former Presidents with crimes while we’re at it.

[deleted]

Re: Grand jury votes to indict Donald Trump

#75

Nearly the entire point of the United States at its founding was that the law should apply to political leaders. We are overdue for setting the precedent of a former President being charged with a crime, and we ought to go back and charge a few other former Presidents with crimes while we’re at it.

Meanwhile, adjacent to presidents, Henry Kissinger remains both alive and not charged in any international criminal courts. I think he's literally 99 years old now.

Doesn't the US credibly threaten to invade the Hague should any international court there decide to pursue charges against an American citizen?

Best you could hope for is domestic charges or for Kissinger to make a visit to Viet Nam and get arrested there.

Re: Grand jury votes to indict Donald Trump

#76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even in the absolute worst case scenario for Trump (he loses and... has a massive fine? Is in jail for a bit?), this is a huge boost to Trump's campaign handed to him on a silver platter. Honestly thats exactly what Democrats want too, as they would rather run against Trump than Desantis or a Never Trumper.

This framing comes up all the time. Is there anything that would…not be good for Trump’s campaign?

Yes... but it takes a global pandemic at exactly the right time. That doesn't change his support, but it does get people off the couch who might otherwise have decided that Both Sides Are Bad.

Other than that most news is Heads I Win Tails You Lose. Any publicity is good publicity when it puts you in front of cameras to cast aspersions on your opponents.

Re: Grand jury votes to indict Donald Trump

#77
post #46

[flagged]

Just refreshed after being away for a while, and it now shows as [flagged]. I think years ago HN used to have a way you could "vouch" for flagged content to unflag it, but I don't see the option, maybe they took it away at some point?

It's possible to "vouch" stories by emailing hn@ycombinator.com.

(It's also possible to dispute various actions, including HN mods disabling/overriding flags, if you feel that the decision was ill-founded, in the same manner.)

Re: Grand jury votes to indict Donald Trump

#80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Meanwhile, adjacent to presidents, Henry Kissinger remains both alive and not charged in any international criminal courts. I think he's literally 99 years old now.

Doesn't the US credibly threaten to invade the Hague should any international court there decide to pursue charges against an American citizen? Best you could hope for is domestic charges or for Kissinger to make a visit to Viet Nam and get arrested there.

I don't think one NATO country can credibly threaten to invade another, so not really, no... But clearly the US did not sign up to the international criminal court / war crimes courts etc because they were worried about random US DoD personnel who killed civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan being hauled in front of the court. Somebody like Robert Bales for instance:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kandahar_massacre

As he has been sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole the US takes the position that they want to prosecute such things within their own system.

Post reply on HN