Does Trump ever do any jail time? (3 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"?

 

[Optimus Prime]

The criminal case against Donald Trump is "both comprehensive and compelling," according to a conservative columnist, but it remains uncertain whether he will ever be prosecuted for his role in the Jan. 6 insurrection.

A federal judge found the former president had "more likely than not" broke the law in his attempt to remain power, and the House select committee has revealed strong evidence for prosecution, but The Bulwark's Charlie Sykes said the decision to charge Trump carried immense political and historical weight.

"Failure to charge Trump with anything would essentially concede that current and former presidents are above the law," Sykes wrote.

The fallout from indicting Trump could be intense, emotional and potentially violent, and the former president has already called for huge protests if he's charged with any crimes, which Sykes said was clearly meant as a threat to intimidate prosecutors.

"But they shouldn’t worry about the politics, because whatever they decide it will be awful," Sykes said.......

Trump prosecution necessary -- no matter how 'awful' the MAGA movement response: conservative

 

[eman623]

My crystal ball is on the fritz, but personally, I don't see Trump being charged or doing any jail time, if for no other reason that no one in Washington ever faces serious repercussions for illegal politics.

It also seems like there's no obvious smoking gun tying Trump to anything. There's no evidence of coordination or collusion between the president and the Jan 6 numbskulls, or the GOP officials who certified lists of fake electors.

It's pretty obvious that Donald Trump didn't think he lost because Donald Trump never loses at anything. His hope appears to have been to whip up so much chaos and uncertainty that the normal electoral process would break down and the election would be thrown into the House of Representatives. Is that against the law? If not, it ought to be. But like I said before, there's a lot of stuff that you would need to prove to convict Trump. I just don't see it happening.

 

[Saintamaniac]

It also seems like there's no obvious smoking gun tying Trump to anything.

There's an audio tape of trump asking the secretary of state in GA to "find" him 11,780 votes. I think in GA, along with the testimony that they have already collected, that is enough to indict and convict trump.

There's no evidence of coordination or collusion between the president and the Jan 6 numbskulls, or the GOP officials who certified lists of fake electors.

I think there's plenty of evidence of coordination and collusion that the J6 committee has already revealed.

I think there are a number of folks hoping that trump is not indicted or convicted and I think those people will be disappointed. Trump will be indicted. If his supporters come with the BS, I don't think it will be a repeat of J6. If they choose to protest, by all means, let them protest. It's their right under the constitution that they shirt on. However if they come with the same "storm the castle" attitude from J6, there will be a lot of trump supporters in mourning for their family members that decided to play stupid games.

 

[eman623]

There's an audio tape of trump asking the secretary of state in GA to "find" him 11,780 votes. I think in GA, along with the testimony that they have already collected, that is enough to indict and convict trump.

I think there's plenty of evidence of coordination and collusion that the J6 committee has already revealed.

I think there are a number of folks hoping that trump is not indicted or convicted and I think those people will be disappointed. Trump will be indicted. If his supporters come with the BS, I don't think it will be a repeat of J6. If they choose to protest, by all means, let them protest. It's their right under the constitution that they shirt on. However if they come with the same "storm the castle" attitude from J6, there will be a lot of trump supporters in mourning for their family members that decided to play stupid games.

What law does asking someone to find (without scare quotes) votes break?

I've not seen any evidence of direct coordination or collusion between Trump and the J6 numbskulls.

Indicting trump will not accomplish anything.

 

[MT15]

What law does asking someone to find (without scare quotes) votes break?

I've not seen any evidence of direct coordination or collusion between Trump and the J6 numbskulls.

Indicting trump will not accomplish anything.

Trump knew the votes had been confirmed in Georgia. He knew there weren’t that many votes to “find” anywhere. He said, “there’s nothing wrong with saying you recalculated”.

That’s election fraud. It’s pretty cut and dried.

 

[Optimus Prime]

After seven hearings held by the January 6 committee thus far this summer, doubts as to who is responsible have been resolved.

The evidence is now overwhelming that Donald Trump was the driving force behind a massive criminal conspiracy to interfere with the official January 6 congressional proceeding and to defraud the United States of a fair election outcome.

The evidence is clearer and more robust than we as former federal prosecutors—two of us as Department of Justice officials in Republican administrations—thought possible before the hearings began.

Trump was not just a willing beneficiary of a complex plot in which others played most of the primary roles. While in office, he himself was the principal actor in nearly all of its phases, personally executing key parts of most of its elements and aware of or involved in its worst features, including the use of violence on Capitol Hill.

Most remarkably, he did so over vehement objections raised at every turn, even by his sycophantic and loyal handpicked team. This was Trump’s project all along.

Everyone knew before the hearings began that we were dealing with perhaps the gravest imaginable offense against the nation short of secession—a serious nationwide effort pursued at multiple levels to overturn the unambiguous outcome of a national election.

We all knew as well that efforts were and are unfolding nationwide to change laws and undermine electoral processes with the specific objective of succeeding at the same project in 2024 and after. But each hearing has sharpened our understanding that Donald Trump himself is the one who made it happen…….

The DOJ Must Prosecute Trump

The January 6 committee has provided overwhelming evidence that the former president was not some bit player along for the ride, but the central driver of a nefarious plot.

www.theatlantic.com

 

[superchuck500]

What law does asking someone to find (without scare quotes) votes break?

I've not seen any evidence of direct coordination or collusion between Trump and the J6 numbskulls.

Indicting trump will not accomplish anything.

I think there is compelling evidence that Trump's response to the election results followed three steps, each of which was deliberate, intentional, and fully supported/endorsed by Trump himself: (1) challenge the results in key swing states --> (failed) --> (2) attempt to subvert the electoral counting and certification process with sham "alternate electors" strategy --> (failed) --> (3) call on his base (a minority of voters) including right-wing organizations with claimed ability to use violence to advance their interests to disrupt the counting proceeding and coerce Mike Pence to follow the spurious plan cooked up by Eastman.

And along the way various acts supported this strategy including asking state election officials to change certified results, DOD's refusal to grant DC's request for national guard to defend the Capitol, and Trump's communications and public statements along the way priming his supporters for what happened. Trump literally invited his supporters to DC on January 6 where he promised things would "be wild." A president who had no intention of disrupting the ceremonial events of Congress that day wouldn't be talking about things being "wild".

Here's the problem I have: as an American democracy, can we see an attempted insurrection and refuse to hold accountable those who organized and perpetrated it? I think it's a very challenging question and fraught with risk on both paths. But how can we see these actions, clear as day as to what they were, and then refuse accountability because the key perpetrator is a politician who is very strongly popular with a large number, but ultimately a minority, of Americans?

Banana Republics do indeed see prosecutions of opposition politicians - but they're shams, they're politically motivated and lack real substance as to the allegations. Here, we all saw with our very eyes a president who lost an election but refused, to the point of orchestrating a coup, to concede. It's not the same and I question how much we really value our "peaceful transfer of power" that is a cornerstone of American longevity if we take no action against those who intentionally tried to subvert that crucial process.

 

[Optimus Prime]

For decades, Donald J. Trump has boasted with impunity about a subject close to his heart and ego: his net worth.

“I look better if I’m worth $10 billion than if I’m worth $4 billion,” he once said when disputing his ranking on the Forbes billionaires list. In a court case, he acknowledged that when it came to describing the value of his brand, “I’m as accurate as I think I can be.” And when he described his self-aggrandizing style in his book, “The Art of the Deal,” he chose a phrase that has followed him ever since: “truthful hyperbole.”’

But now, Mr. Trump will face questions under oath about that pattern of embellishment in an investigation that may shape the future of his family real estate business. The former president and his eldest daughter, Ivanka Trump, are expected to be questioned later this month by the New York State attorney general’s office, which has been conducting a civil investigation into whether he and his company fraudulently inflated the value of his assets. His son, Donald Trump Jr., was interviewed last week, according to people with knowledge of the matter.

The attorney general, Letitia James, has argued in court papers that “fraudulent or misleading” business practices reigned at the Trump Organization for years, and has said her investigators must question the Trumps to determine who was responsible. Mr. Trump fought hard to avoid an interview, but a judge ordered him to face questioning, and investigators will seek to elicit answers that might reveal whether he approved any bogus valuations of his hotels, golf clubs and other assets.

Even a single misstep in the deposition could be costly for Mr. Trump, who is also the focus of a separate criminal investigation into the same issues. Although that investigation by the Manhattan district attorney’s office lost momentum early this year, prosecutors are planning to review Mr. Trump’s answers and any incriminating statements or clumsy comments could breathe new life into it...........

Trump Faces Questions About His Net Worth in Interview He Tried to Avoid

Former President Donald J. Trump has embraced the verbal sparring of legal depositions in the past, but now faces significant risk.

www.nytimes.com

 

[eman623]

Trump knew the votes had been confirmed in Georgia. He knew there weren’t that many votes to “find” anywhere. He said, “there’s nothing wrong with saying you recalculated”.

That’s election fraud. It’s pretty cut and dried.

Not so cut and dried. I think it's a little more attached and wet than that.

Good luck proving what Trump "knew" and when he knew it.

And even if he did "know" the votes had been certified, it's still not illegal to ask if any more votes can be found.

 

[eman623]

I think there is compelling evidence that Trump's response to the election results followed three steps, each of which was deliberate, intentional, and fully supported/endorsed by Trump himself: (1) challenge the results in key swing states --> (failed) --> (2) attempt to subvert the electoral counting and certification process with sham "alternate electors" strategy --> (failed) --> (3) call on his base (a minority of voters) including right-wing organizations with claimed ability to use violence to advance their interests to disrupt the counting proceeding and coerce Mike Pence to follow the spurious plan cooked up by Eastman.

And along the way various acts supported this strategy including asking state election officials to change certified results, DOD's refusal to grant DC's request for national guard to defend the Capitol, and Trump's communications and public statements along the way priming his supporters for what happened. Trump literally invited his supporters to DC on January 6 where he promised things would "be wild." A president who had no intention of disrupting the ceremonial events of Congress that day wouldn't be talking about things being "wild".

Here's the problem I have: as an American democracy, can we see an attempted insurrection and refuse to hold accountable those who organized and perpetrated it? I think it's a very challenging question and fraught with risk on both paths. But how can we see these actions, clear as day as to what they were, and then refuse accountability because the key perpetrator is a politician who is very strongly popular with a large number, but ultimately a minority, of Americans?

Banana Republics do indeed see prosecutions of opposition politicians - but they're shams, they're politically motivated and lack real substance as to the allegations. Here, we all saw with our very eyes a president who lost an election but refused, to the point of orchestrating a coup, to concede. It's not the same and I question how much we really value our "peaceful transfer of power" that is a cornerstone of American longevity if we take no action against those who intentionally tried to subvert that crucial process.

Leaving aside the problems the DOJ will face in a criminal prosecution, We have been here before.

Ford pardoned Nixon and allowed the nation to move forward. it was the right call.

But the Dems of 2022 don't want to move forward. They need Trump as the eternal Goldstein.

The blather about accountability rings hollow when you consider Hillary's mishandling of thousands of classified emails and the Biden family's grift.

And spare me the, "But Trump!". Yes, what Trump did was bad. So stipulated. Now move on. Dot org.

 

[zztop]

ah! the good ol' "but her ermaillllss" defense. How many years did that investigation take? Here, I'll help: 2 years 4 months

 

[SFIDC3]

Leaving aside the problems the DOJ will face in a criminal prosecution, We have been here before.

Ford pardoned Nixon and allowed the nation to move forward. it was the right call.

But the Dems of 2022 don't want to move forward. They need Trump as the eternal Goldstein.

The blather about accountability rings hollow when you consider Hillary's mishandling of thousands of classified emails and the Biden family's grift.

And spare me the, "But Trump!". Yes, what Trump did was bad. So stipulated. Now move on. Dot org.

Spare me this total BS post…..whether you like it or not (seems some doth protest too much) Trump is very much in danger of being prosecuted and should be….save the move on BS for folks that think this can’t and won’t happen again, because anyone with a modicum of common sense knows the right wing looneys will show up again if Trump remains relevant….both sides my a$$…..

 

[RebSaint]

Both Sides!

 

[brandon]

The blather about accountability rings hollow when you consider Hillary's mishandling of thousands of classified emails and the Biden family's grift.

Nah. This is where we differ.

If Hillary committed a crime, put her on trial and if convicted, put her in jail. Same with Hunter. Same with Joe. Same with Trump.

That’s the consistent, correct position to hold.

“But her emails!” is just a deflection so your boy doesn’t get what’s coming to him.

 

[eman623]

Nah. This is where we differ.

If Hillary committed a crime, put her on trial and if convicted, put her in jail. Same with Hunter. Same with Joe. Same with Trump.

That’s the consistent, correct position to hold.

“But her emails!” is just a deflection so your boy doesn’t get what’s coming to him.

Hillary did commit a crime. Yet she will never go to trial. Because no one ever does. Neither will Joe Biden. Hunter may go to trial, but even that is uncertain if Merrick Garland has any say. He'll just decline to prosecute and that will be that.

Same with Lois Lerner. The folks who created the subprime crisis. Or a thousand other people.

Trump alone needs to be frog-marched into court. It might happen. The left needs this because they literally have nothing else to offer. Or maybe not. Garland has an uphill road

 

[Saintamaniac]

Hillary did commit a crime.

And exactly what crime did Hillary commit other than the crime of being smarter than every damn republican in congress?

Trump alone needs to be frog-marched into court. It might happen. The left needs this because they literally have nothing else to offer.

Not Trump alone. Trump and everyone who helped him in his ATTEMPTED COUP. The COUNTRY needs this because the majority of Republicans are lying treasonous hypocritical racists Christian nationalist religious zealots. I'll take what the left is offering over what the Trumplicans are offering any day of the week.

 

[bird]

Hillary did commit a crime. Yet she will never go to trial. Because no one ever does. Neither will Joe Biden. Hunter may go to trial, but even that is uncertain if Merrick Garland has any say. He'll just decline to prosecute and that will be that.

Same with Lois Lerner. The folks who created the subprime crisis. Or a thousand other people.

Trump alone needs to be frog-marched into court. It might happen. The left needs this because they literally have nothing else to offer. Or maybe not. Garland has an uphill road

What crime has Joe Biden committed? Hunter Biden has traded on his family name. Sound like anyone else? As for claims about Hunter Biden and China one has just two words: Ivanka’s trademarks.

As for nothing left to offer? Please. Name one thing that Republicans offer besides white grievance.

 

[BullSheetBuddha]

There's an audio tape of trump asking the secretary of state in GA to "find" him 11,780 votes. I think in GA, along with the testimony that they have already collected, that is enough to indict and convict trump.

I think there's plenty of evidence of coordination and collusion that the J6 committee has already revealed.

I think there are a number of folks hoping that trump is not indicted or convicted and I think those people will be disappointed. Trump will be indicted. If his supporters come with the BS, I don't think it will be a repeat of J6. If they choose to protest, by all means, let them protest. It's their right under the constitution that they shirt on. However if they come with the same "storm the castle" attitude from J6, there will be a lot of trump supporters in mourning for their family members that decided to play stupid games.

There was a time, not too long ago, when I didn't care if Trump was prosecuted and jailed. I only wanted him to go away. That has changed. I think it would be a mistake not to jail him, or at least try.