Is Donald Trump Done for?
- Thread starter Archbob
- Start date
Estebonrober
Deity
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2017
- Messages
- 5,867
? Care to elaborate on this thought? Presidents might not be indictable by the federal but I do not believe its been litigated whether a state can bring a charge or not, I'm not sure and would love to hear of any prior examples.
Gori the Grey
The Poster
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2009
- Messages
- 11,008
And the resistance to the investigation even more so.
Trump is providing a test of all our systems regarding presidential conduct and what is/will be allowed.
Trump has enough dirt on him that the Israelis are able to blackmail him into staying in Syria another 4 months.
The Constitution has Congress trying the President for any crimes. So it was doomed to be political from the get-go. Trump could blow up a bank and take all the money--the only reason he might get tried for that would be because it is not popular to let a guy like that go. And the banks have lobbyists.
The Constitution has Congress trying the President for any crimes. So it was doomed to be political from the get-go. Trump could blow up a bank and take all the money--the only reason he might get tried for that would be because it is not popular to let a guy like that go. And the banks have lobbyists.
hobbsyoyo
Deity
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2012
- Messages
- 26,575
It is not settled that a President cannot be indicted for Federal crimes either. There have been weighty legal opinions on it both ways (mostly against the idea) but no real precedent or laws that I am aware of.
Given that Trump and McConnell have thrown out every other customary practice, parliamentary courtesy and unwritten rule in pursuit of power, I do not believe we should honor this one above all the others.
This is a criminal enterprise running our government and people must be held accountable.
There is actually legal standing concerning sitting Presidents. Its called Sovereign Immunity, one of the things we held over from the British. The only legal way for anyone to bring criminal or civil litigation against the President would be for Congress to impeach him and have the Senate try the case.
I don't believe this is true. Sovereign Immunity applies at the government level and not at the individual level.
Gori the Grey
The Poster
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2009
- Messages
- 11,008
There's a DoJ policy and nothing more. Birdjaguar has it right:
the laws on this matter are going to be settled by the Trump presidency.
And there are lots of players. It will be complicated.
the Democratic House
the Republican Senate
DOJ
Mueller investigation and his targets past and future
SDNY
State of NY et al
Supreme Court
The American Public
Putin
The Donald himself
Fox News
the 2020 election candidates
Each of those is a moving piece and only some are predictable to any degree.
That is a very good point that I admit I hadn't even thought of before hearing you say it.
EDIT: However... upon reflection... I must admit that despite Trump's pleading for him to do so... McConnell has so far declined to throw out the legislative filibuster to pass Trump's border wall funding.
Gori the Grey
The Poster
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2009
- Messages
- 11,008
No.
Anything could happen, but at the moment I'd say it won't. In the short-term. However, if ‘building a wall’ becomes a war-cry thrown at everything, as part of a general blame-the-foreigners strategy, then we might well see it happen because the centre is pushed ever rightwards by a vocal minority in the face of a silent, apathetic majority, as was the case with Brexit and any of a thousand other events.
I think their main right-wing problem will be that afaik most of the border is a river, so a wall will render that river useless for the usa. Maybe it already is useless, though.
Of course the size of it all would mean it would cost tens of billions if it is to be an actual working obstacle.
Of course the size of it all would mean it would cost tens of billions if it is to be an actual working obstacle.
In Texas the Rio Grande is a river that is mostly wet. Further west there are no river borders. A huge problem for the wall is acquisition of right of way from landowners who do not want a wall. Court battles are already underway and can slow things greatly, meaning years and years.
hobbsyoyo
Deity
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2012
- Messages
- 26,575
Trump scuttled the funding deal at the 11 hour. McConnell could not have pulled off that rule change after the deal fell through before Congress recessed. He still could do it now but it won't help as the House will vote down any funding bills he passes as of tomorrow. But the window he had to change that rule and have any impact with it closed almost as soon as it was required due to the holiday recess.
And he did end the filibuster everywhere else it counted. That Republicans haven't done more is mostly a function of weak leadership in the House, not McConnell's failure to deliver. On top of that, he's stuffed the courts faster than ever before in history (group judge interviews!) and stole a SCOTUS nomination in a way that will reverberate in our history forever. He's weaponized the traditions and rules (written or unwritten) of the Senate in a way that almost puts the weaponization of the gerrymandering in the House to shame.
He is truly one of the worst politicians we have had since the Civil War. He is almost as bad as Trump for different reasons.
Last edited:
‘Almost’? He knows exactly what he's doing, just like the Donald. And he doesn't care, just like the Donald. He's just better at hiding it and looking like a patriot, but it's a double (x-ple) act.
As you say:
hobbsyoyo said:
It really sounds like group admission exams when Cuban-trained ‘revolutionaries’ took over universities in 1970s Latin America.
Similar threads
