America - The Official Thread
- Thread starter ///M-Spec
- 38,559 comments
- 1,561,505 views
- 2,931
- Massachusetts
- GBO-Possum
- 17,026
- Grea'er Laandan
- UKMikeyA
- UKMikeyA
The seaside was submerged in sebaceous, cetaceous sludge and slurry.
- 2,931
- Massachusetts
- GBO-Possum
- 4,273
- SoCal
- GTP_MooCow
Just the tip of the melting iceberg
- 2,931
- Massachusetts
- GBO-Possum
McLaren
Premium
- 44,957
- Texas
This had to be the easiest of the Trump cases to prove. Cohen went to jail covering for Trump, thereby validating he was involved in a crime in an undefined regard. Cohen returned with hard evidence, not just his testimony. Defense witness got caught lying multiple times from said evidence. Trump claimed multiple times he was not allowed to speak, but also would take the stand to prove his innocence. He did neither because his lawyers knew he would open himself up to further questioning & 99% implicate himself because he's that stupid.
Conservative grifters can bitch all they want about how unfair this trial is b/c they'll be ironically right; Trump has been found guilty of multiple counts, but will not ever spend a day in an actual jail unlike the rest of us.
Conservative grifters can bitch all they want about how unfair this trial is b/c they'll be ironically right; Trump has been found guilty of multiple counts, but will not ever spend a day in an actual jail unlike the rest of us.
- 4,273
- SoCal
- GTP_MooCow
McLaren
Premium
- 44,957
- Texas
Because at the end of the day, he was still a President & I would be shocked if the justice system in this country ever allowed a former President to actually serve time in a jail. I highly expect if he were to face any punishment, he'll be confined to his home in Florida.
Danoff
Premium
- 33,367
- Mile High City
- 13,822
- Adelaide
- Neomone
Last I heard it's a bit of an open question as to whether the president can pardon themself. I mean, the obvious kindergarten level logic would say that of course no one should be able to pardon themselves for crimes they committed. But in a purely legalistic sense it's one of those "maybe but it doesn't look like anyone ever took that idea seriously enough to actually explicitly exclude the possibility and no one has ever been stupid enough to try before".
Realistically, it would probably come down to the Supreme Court making a ruling on it. And while in normal times that should be a slam dunk for "of course you can't pardon yourself, don't be ****ing stupid", that's not really as clear in 2024. They might well rule that the President is entirely above the law, and that Nixon resigned for nothing.
- 29,110
- Bratvegas
- GTP_Liquid
As a reminder I posted around the impeachments, the Nixon administration wrote a paper on the theoretical possibility of invoking the 25th amendment, having the Vice President take temporary charge, pardon the President and then return the powers of office to the President, thusly the President doesn't pardon himself.
This wasn't something the Nixon administration was close to using (despite what you might think) but they looked at the statutes as to what was theoretically possible. As to whether it would work or be accepted in practice is another matter.
This wasn't something the Nixon administration was close to using (despite what you might think) but they looked at the statutes as to what was theoretically possible. As to whether it would work or be accepted in practice is another matter.
- 4,273
- SoCal
- GTP_MooCow
This reminds me of this
I was having a discussion within my circles and was arguing that:
Because when the Constitution was written, it was self evident, and it goes without saying that, Or rather it wasn't even considered to be a possibility of such situation: no one would accept a convict to become president...
Little do they know that this country would be reduced to being so stupid in less than 300 years.
It is like making into law that you have to eat to survive or breath air to live... Does the Constitution have to say that?
Are we reduced to spelling out every thing that should or should not happen ? Lawyer's fault for finding loopholes.
I guess so, because we are to stupid to know better...
Need hand holding...
Yet, There are also a lot of rules in this country, but it seems they do not apply to certain people (rich and powerful)
Great .. two face double standard society
It is What it is...
That's probably why trump says and the right keep on saying this country could become like Venezuela or such, where the street revolting and uprising happens, so they want to become a more authoritarian regime to outlaws freedom and keep themselves in power...
they see it happening and want to keep the door shut right away...
This large gap in wealth is the fuel of those sentiment on both sides of the aisle.
We wouldn't have any of this if wealth was more fair and equally spread, no ?
The power grab is what led to all this... And those poor idiots who are literally poor on the right, sadly thinks they will be protected by their rich friends, when in fact they will also feed betrayed down the line, in the sad eventuality that the Reigt/GOP succeed.
Poor education system and the money grab by the healthcare system in this country, combined with the glitched government....are what make this country go dow the gutter.
The government only has itself to blame...
Similar to how kids turn out bad mainly because of their parents... But I understand this statement can be seen from different perspectives...
- 85,489
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
No. The Constitution (and Bill of Rights) describes the functions and limitations of governance only.
- 4,273
- SoCal
- GTP_MooCow
- 85,489
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
But... they're right. The Constitution - which establishes functions and limitations of government - does not include any stipulation that a felon, or even a current convict, cannot take up the role of President.
I doubt the framers didn't consider the possibility, as they would pretty much have all been considered criminals by the British. Aaron Burr even faced a trial for duelling while Vice-President - having shot and killed fellow Founding Father Alexander Hamilton.
- 23,696
- It/It
- GTP_TheCracker
From what i've read a president can't pardon himself of state convictions (like this one) but potentially can parden himself from federal convictions (like the classified documents one will be) but even then, if he does try to pardon himself it's likely to go in front of the supreme court for them to decide.
McLaren
Premium
- 44,957
- Texas
I mean, Eugene Debs was a socialist politician convicted of sedition to the US in 1918. In 1920, he ran for President a 2nd time from prison & received just over 900,000 votes (3%).
To clarify, I'm not saying Debs is anywhere on Trump's level. Debs actually gave a **** about Americans. But, his case shows a convicted felon can run & that they have supporters who will stand by them. Trump would clearly have the same outcome of retaining his supporters from a jail cell as well, but that includes the fact he'd likely lose a ton of support (Debs went from 6% of the Presidential vote during his first election to 3% when he ran the second time).
Alito & Thomas won't even need to be present. The American public already knows their ruling on that.
Last edited:
