this post was submitted on 16 Feb 2024
755 points (98.1% liked)

politics

19088 readers
3682 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Trump’s New York case will begin in March

A New York judge ruled Thursday that Donald Trump will stand trial in March on charges related to the Stormy Daniels coverup. Assuming the case goes forward as scheduled, Trump will be the first former president ever to be criminally tried. It will also be the first criminal case to slot in place among the complicated judicial calendar Trump is facing in this election year, and it means Trump will almost certainly face a jury before Election Day. In three other jurisdictions—Georgia state court and federal courts in Florida, and Washington, D.C.—Trump has been indicted on charges related to the 2020 elections and his retention of classified documents, but the timetable for those cases remains unclear.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Jackcooper@lemmy.world 71 points 9 months ago (6 children)

Is there any chance on earth that he actually goes to jail for even a day?

[–] ryven@lemmy.dbzer0.com 44 points 9 months ago (4 children)

I think it's way more likely that he gets sentenced to house arrest, which he could serve at Mar a Lago. The other option is to have Secret Service agents following him around inside a prison trying to protect him from the other inmates (and possibly the guards), and I don't think either the prisons or the Secret Service want to deal with that.

[–] Weirdmusic@lemmy.world 34 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Actually they could throw him in a maximum security prison and condem him to solitary confinement (for his own protection you know) and that would negate the need for the Secret Service

[–] ouRKaoS@lemmy.today 24 points 9 months ago (1 children)

The Secret Service would still need to be around to protect him from the guards & the ghost of Epstein.

[–] DrDeadCrash@programming.dev 19 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Maybe a disgraced ex president shouldn't receive an honor guard?

[–] MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago

ADX Florence sitting in the corner patiently.

[–] mriguy@lemmy.world 16 points 9 months ago (1 children)

"Yeah, he's a convicted felon, but we can't put him in jail because that would inconvenience the Secret Service."

Nope. Sorry it's a burden for them, but they can figure it out. Make a prison out of the brig on an abandoned military base in the middle of nowhere with him as the only prisoner. It worked for Rudolph Hess.

It's really not even that big of a burden. They already have wings for people like former cops and child molesters, so he'll fit in nicely. They'll just need a chair for the SS detail.

[–] quackers@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Prison is for poor people, not presidents. I think most people understand that not everyone is equal under the law at this point in time.

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 10 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Ulysses S. Grant set the precedent that a sitting president can be prosecuted in 1872 while he was president, and got pulled over, for the third time, for "speeding on a horse inside the city limits of Washington DC." He told the officer that attempted to let him go, that Congress had literally passed article 1983 the previous year, and that even The POTUS doesn't have immunity. Sure it was a speeding ticket, but that's still precedent, with a statute to back it up.

The statute in question needs to be reviewed by The SCOTUS, as they were provided incorrectly edited wording of that statute, ommiting 16 crucial words of the law, in the case of Harlow vs. Fitzgerald in 1982, and illegally set up the Qualified Immunity Doctrine.

[–] DrDeadCrash@programming.dev 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Fuck that, execute the fucker then

[–] bitwolf@lemmy.one 0 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

I thought he had to forfeit Mar A Lago because he falsely claimed it to be a primary residence which it isn't

[–] Natanael 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Not forfeited but he's convicted of fraud for the false valuation, and the sum is high enough he may be forced to sell it to cover the judgement

[–] bitwolf@lemmy.one 1 points 9 months ago

Thank you for clarifying 😊

[–] johannesvanderwhales@lemmy.world 28 points 9 months ago (2 children)

For this? No. For the Georgia case? It's a real possibility if he doesn't get elected.

[–] Chocrates@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

If he gets jail time for a state case he can't pardon himself. It'd be interesting how the state would handle it. Would they let him defer his prison sentence until after his term?

[–] johannesvanderwhales@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

There's no precedent whatsoever, so no one knows what would happen. Meanwhile Trump would absolutely use every tool at his disposal as president to disrupt the process. It's hard to see that not heading into a constitutional crisis.

[–] GiddyGap@lemm.ee 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

I think Fani Willis screwed that up.

[–] pearsaltchocolatebar@discuss.online 16 points 9 months ago (2 children)

None at all. As a last resort they'll (successfully) make a incompetency plea, which is true. The man isn't competent enough to tie his shoes without adult supervision.

[–] Witchfire@lemmy.world 32 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

In a sane world, an incompetency plea would bar someone from office

[–] RGB3x3@lemmy.world 21 points 9 months ago

That would mean:

Too incompetent to be found guilty of a crime, but still somehow competent enough to hold arguably the most important position in the world.

Please make it make sense.

[–] johannesvanderwhales@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago (1 children)

That's not how incompetency pleas work.

[–] pearsaltchocolatebar@discuss.online 0 points 9 months ago (2 children)

He has dementia. It is how incompetency pleas work.

Not really.

A diagnosis of dementia would not automatically preclude someone from standing trial. Being incompetent to stand trial means that you can't assist your defense. I think that's a pretty high bar. Trump is obviously not one of our sharpest minds but he can't be competent enough to make speeches on TV (even if they are rants) while simultaneously be incompetent such that he can't discuss his case with his lawyers.

[–] johannesvanderwhales@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)
[–] pearsaltchocolatebar@discuss.online 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I mean, have you not been paying attention for the last 4 years? He's been on a mental decline for a while now. It's just a matter of time before he has a sundowning tantrum on live TV.

Also, I know serval people in the mental health and elderly care fields, and they've known for a while now.

[–] johannesvanderwhales@lemmy.world -1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Being an asshole doesn't mean you have dementia, nor does that fact that you don't like Trump mean that he has a degenerative mental condition. Sorry, believing that is on the same level as believing qanon.

All you have to do is watch interviews of him from the 2000s to know that he's experienced significant cognitive decline.

He's always been a stupid narcissistic asshole, but he's clearly demented.

Also, I guess you missed the part where people with experience in the subject confirmed what I said.

[–] stoly@lemmy.world 10 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Yes, but not in this case. Some of the other cases will get him there and it will be glorious.

[–] Trollception@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago (2 children)

But if he becomes president he can grant himself immunity correct?

[–] stoly@lemmy.world 7 points 9 months ago (2 children)

One of those unanswered questions is whether a president can pardon themself. This has never been tried so it's never been tested. I presume that the answer is no.

[–] tacosplease@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago

I thought the consensus among experts was that a sitting president can do that.

He still couldn't pardon himself for state crimes in GA though. Even the governor can't pardon him in GA. That state requires a board to approve it or something like that.

[–] Meron35@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

SCOTUS: No but actually yes

[–] RagingRobot@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

We just need to make sure he doesn't become president

[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 10 points 9 months ago (2 children)

The most likely situation is barred from running for President while he continues to spew lies and vitriol from the sidelines. We also can’t ignore the possibility of his progeny running for office thanks to the dynastic view these scumbag wealthy types tend to take of their money and power.

[–] johannesvanderwhales@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago

There is nothing about this case that would bar him from running for office. This is unrelated to Jan 6.

[–] Fapper_McFapper@lemmynsfw.com 2 points 9 months ago

We also can’t ignore the possibility of his progeny running for office…

You just made me throw up so hard.

[–] Son_of_dad@lemmy.world 6 points 9 months ago

No. Best we can hope for is to bog him down in appeals and lawsuits, till his heart pops from a big Mac