Grand jury votes to indict Donald Trump
871–880 of 1001 posts
Re: Grand jury votes to indict Donald Trump
#872Earlier quoted context omitted.
No. When Trump was in power, he mattered and his nonsense had real consequences, and he had a presence on all of the major social media platforms, and people willing to take violence to the streets for him. Now he's shrieking in all caps in his little corner of the internet and making deranged threats about "consequences" if he's arrested and... almost no one seems to care. He's no longer leader of the free world, he…
I want the next Trump to know they're not above the law. This indictment is good practice for our system. Trump caught it off guard because so much ran on tradition and the assumption that presidents think the constitution is rad because they pledge to protect it.
Re: Grand jury votes to indict Donald Trump
#873Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your characterization of who voted for Trump is way off [1]. 42% of female voters, 36% of voters 18-29. Your post also implies that older generations supported Roe, but it is widely accepted that the precedent established in Roe was legislation via the judicial branch. It was an undemocratic law forced upon them, rather than something they chose. Three quarters of states had laws criminalizing abortions at the time t…
Mailing an absentee ballot to a dead person is not a crime. Returning an absentee ballot for a dead person is. And guess who did the latter? https://apnews.com/article/election-2020-government-and-poli...
Either way, I think "is not a crime" is a low bar; "is morally correct and aligns with democratic principles" seems more correct in this case. Our system is founded on the principle of "one person, one vote". Anything that isn't in accordance with that (e.g. mailing a ballot to a dead person), even if it isn't illegal, seems like something our society should minimize or have fail-safes to prevent.
[1]: https://apnews.com/article/voter-fraud-election-2020-joe-bid...
Re: Grand jury votes to indict Donald Trump
#874I commented on my understanding of the situation on reddit a while ago. Copy/pasting here: He paid off Stormy Daniels to keep her from talking about their relationship. Paying her to stay silent is 100% legal, there is absolutely no issue with an NDA like that. The illegal part isn't the what, it's the how. Political campaigning laws set a limited budget for how much money you can spend on campaigning, which is defin…
Not a lawyer, nor am I American. No horse in this except maybe a citizen of the world. This seems like a weak case to me. For a former president and polarizing figure, you would think the bar on prosecution would be air tight. If he goes to jail for a crime the population (or his support base) considers is trivial or if he does not get convicted, it raises Trump's stock to the stratosphere. Perhaps if he goes to jail…
Re: Grand jury votes to indict Donald Trump
#875Earlier quoted context omitted.
>It sounds like they have to prove two separate crimes, and connect them with intention. Intent of course is always hard to prove in court. Michael Cohen pled guilty and was sentenced to three years for the campaign finance law, and he's been very vocal about Trump's knowledge and involvement. So proving intent doesn't seem impossible. And, by definition, falsifying business records comes with a record of false infor…
I've seen arguments in the right-ophere that Cohen improperly plead guilty to a non-crime. Which seems like a weird thing for a high-level well-connected lawyer to do.
Re: Grand jury votes to indict Donald Trump
#876I'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…
The entire impossibility of prosecuting Trump is weird to me. There's a host of crimes to pick from, from using/withholding already approved support for Ukraine to bribe/blackmail Zelensky for personal gain (dirt on a political opponent), to pressuring people to violate election laws, to instigating the January 6 attack on the Capitol, to keeping hundreds of highly classified documents in his basement and lying about it when he's requested to return them.
Lots of people have gone to prison much quicker for a fraction of this. So why is it so hard to prosecute a president or former president? It really feels like he is above the law, and lots of people want presidents to be above the law, apparently.
Re: Grand jury votes to indict Donald Trump
#877I commented on my understanding of the situation on reddit a while ago. Copy/pasting here: He paid off Stormy Daniels to keep her from talking about their relationship. Paying her to stay silent is 100% legal, there is absolutely no issue with an NDA like that. The illegal part isn't the what, it's the how. Political campaigning laws set a limited budget for how much money you can spend on campaigning, which is defin…
Not a lawyer, nor am I American. No horse in this except maybe a citizen of the world. This seems like a weak case to me. For a former president and polarizing figure, you would think the bar on prosecution would be air tight. If he goes to jail for a crime the population (or his support base) considers is trivial or if he does not get convicted, it raises Trump's stock to the stratosphere. Perhaps if he goes to jail…
This i the crux I think - It's clearly a crime, but should he be held accountable or not due to notoriety? personally, I think public figures (especially politicians) should be held to a higher standard than mere-mortals; but many seem to believe the opposite.
You don't want your arrested/prosecuted? Don't elect a morally ambiguous one then. Higher standards, not lower.
Re: Grand jury votes to indict Donald Trump
#878Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why did they only get capone on tax evasion?
That was also an outrageous and silly charge and representative a failure of the legal system to live up to its ideals of process and fairness. It wasn't especially political though, because by and large there is consensus that being a gangster should be illegal and that Capone was probably a gangster. Attempting to take a popular political figure out by blatant abuse of the legal abuse is a bit more concerning.
I assume murder. What else?
Re: Grand jury votes to indict Donald Trump
#879Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's about him paying money to a porn star not to talk about their affair? That's not a crime. Now I can see how they can find some stuff in there to make SOMETHING stick, but if the same kind of scrutiny would be applied in general, 50% of the US population would go to jail. Oh wait, a large percentage of the US population actually IS in jail.
I heard they were going to charge him for painting his house? That's not a crime. What's next, charging him for changing a lightbulb? Oh, that's not what he's being charged with? They don't typically charge high profile cases on a whim for things that aren't a crime? Nevertheless. What's up with the U.S. justice system? No, like what's UP with it!? Haha. What are the basics, and what's an attorney? Why do they wear t…
Re: Grand jury votes to indict Donald Trump
#880Biden should pardon him if he gets convicted. Would do wonders for the unity of our country.
[flagged]