Does Trump ever do any jail time? (2 Viewers)

[Optimus Prime]

Everything I've seen and heard says that the split second Donald Trump is no longer president there will be flood of charges waiting for him

And if he resigns and Pence pardons him there are a ton of state charges as an understudy waiting in the wings if the fed charges can't perform

What do you think the likelihood of there being a jail sentence?

In every movie and TV show I've ever seen, in every political thriller I've ever read about a criminal and corrupt president there is ALWAYS some version of;

"We can't do that to the country",

"A trial would tear the country apart",

"For the nation to heal we need to move on" etc.

Would life imitate art?

Even with the charges, even with the proof the charges are true will the powers that be decide, "we can't do that to the country"?

 

[Roofgardener]

Plenty, but he tends to settle.

Exclusive: Trump's 3,500 lawsuits unprecedented for a presidential nominee

USA TODAY analysis finds 3,500 legal actions by and against Trump, fighting everyone from the government to the vodka makers.

www.usatoday.com

ROFL.... 3500 lawsuites over 30 years. Sounds a bit eye-watering.
You have to dig into it a little deeper before you realise that he was the PLAINTIVE in more than 60% of them.
Sadly, it doesn't list how many of the 1500-odd cases where he was the defendant came up with 'guilty' verdicts ?

 

[jitss617]

For what being great?

 

[DaveXA]

Plenty, but he tends to settle.

Exclusive: Trump's 3,500 lawsuits unprecedented for a presidential nominee

USA TODAY analysis finds 3,500 legal actions by and against Trump, fighting everyone from the government to the vodka makers.

www.usatoday.com

That was from 2016 before he was elected. Interesting, if not really surprising. But a conviction and a settlement are 2 different things. Also, I'm assuming a conviction is related to criminal proceedings rather than civil. That would narrow things quite a bit.

 

[JRad]

ROFL.... 3500 lawsuites over 30 years. Sounds a bit eye-watering.
You have to dig into it a little deeper before you realise that he was the PLAINTIVE in more than 60% of them.
Sadly, it doesn't list how many of the 1500-odd cases where he was the defendant came up with 'guilty' verdicts ?

To be fair, the post you quoted was referencing Trump's pattern of behavior - he's a very litigious fellow.

 

[DaveXA]

ROFL.... 3500 lawsuites over 30 years. Sounds a bit eye-watering.
You have to dig into it a little deeper before you realise that he was the PLAINTIVE in more than 60% of them.
Sadly, it doesn't list how many of the 1500-odd cases where he was the defendant came up with 'guilty' verdicts ?

Fwiw, he gets sued about as much as he sues people, and a lot of that litigation is through his businesses.

Still a an awfully lot of litigation tied to one person though. That's long been the case for Trump. Always baffled me that he was elected President. But people are gullible, so I guess it's not really that surprising.

 

[Roofgardener]

Well, according to the article that JRad posted, over the last 30 years he (or rather, his companies) have settled in 100 out of 1500 (ish) cases.

I can't find a list of cases where he has lost ? I'll keep on looking.

 

[Roofgardener]

Just came across THIS article from The Hill....

Why has Donald Trump not faced charges for criminal incitement?

There is little to back the calls for this action.

thehill.com

In a nutshell, it cautions against believing all the people queuing up to say "Trump can be prosecuted for inciting the occupation of the Capital building. ".

 

[JRad]

Well, according to the article that JRad posted, over the last 30 years he (or rather, his companies) have settled in 100 out of 1500 (ish) cases.

I can't find a list of cases where he has lost ? I'll keep on looking.

I was going to put a disclaimer with what I posted, but a combination laziness and having to get to this training won out.

You may have been looking for more “jailable” offenses, but I thought it worth adding since the post you had quoted was more along the lines of his history. But there are definitely cases in there that were frivolous/more of injury liability. There’s a chart in the link that shows how many were wins/losses/etc, but I’m not sure anyone wants to take the time to look each up haha.

I probably mucked up the conversation a bit by going tangential.

 

[MT15]

Well, there is this.

 

[Roofgardener]

I was going to put a disclaimer with what I posted, but a combination laziness and having to get to this training won out.

You may have been looking for more “jailable” offenses, but I thought it worth adding since the post you had quoted was more along the lines of his history. But there are definitely cases in there that were frivolous/more of injury liability. There’s a chart in the link that shows how many were wins/losses/etc, but I’m not sure anyone wants to take the time to look each up haha.

I probably mucked up the conversation a bit by going tangential.

AHA... you ADMIT to Tangentiality !
< bangs gavel>
Bailiff, take him away and make him sit next to that old guy with the face mask and woolly mittens.

NEXT !

 

[DaveXA]

Well, there is this.

Yep, this is the one I think has potential. Wouldn't surprise me if it sticks.

 

[Saint by the Bay]

Yep, this is the one I think has potential. Wouldn't surprise me if it sticks.

It won't. Criminally prosecuting an ex-President would be such an unbelievable thing that I think it will have to something really egregious. The call was clearly corrupt. Many things he does are. However, is any of it enough to take the unprecedented act of criminally prosecuting an ex-President?

No way. Unless you have dead bodies somewhere you'll never see an ex-President criminally prosecuted.

 

[GrandAdmiral]

It won't. Criminally prosecuting an ex-President would be such an unbelievable thing that I think it will have to something really egregious. The call was clearly corrupt. Many things he does are. However, is any of it enough to take the unprecedented act of criminally prosecuting an ex-President?

No way. Unless you have dead bodies somewhere you'll never see an ex-President criminally prosecuted.

My question is, if it does stick, however, will Kemp come to his rescue after all the crap he put him through?

 

[DaveXA]

It won't. Criminally prosecuting an ex-President would be such an unbelievable thing that I think it will have to something really egregious. The call was clearly corrupt. Many things he does are. However, is any of it enough to take the unprecedented act of criminally prosecuting an ex-President?

No way. Unless you have dead bodies somewhere you'll never see an ex-President criminally prosecuted.

You're probably right, lol. But, I do think this one is probably more clear cut. But, I'm not sure whether a court would accept/hear this case.

 

[Roofgardener]

Meh.. this is a recently-elected Democratic State Attorney trying to get some publicity. He's not the first AG to do this in regard to Trump. Non of the other 'investigations' actually came to anything.

 

[MT15]

Maybe, roof. What did you think of Trump’s phone call to Raffensperger though? Was it on the up and up in your view? Or maybe you didn’t listen to it.

 

[GrandAdmiral]

My question is, if it does stick, however, will Kemp come to his rescue after all the crap he put him through?

So, if Laura Coates on CNN is correct (considering she's a long time prosecutor, I think not), Kemp can't come to Trump's defense. Pardons are done through an independent board.

 

[GrandAdmiral]

Meh.. this is a recently-elected Democratic State Attorney trying to get some publicity. He's not the first AG to do this in regard to Trump. Non of the other 'investigations' actually came to anything.

What about the GA SOS doing the same thing? Is he looking for publicity?