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"?

 

[coldseat]

I know this is how it looks and I have no response to say it isn't.

In my heart, I still believe that the law matters and that while there is often more nuance and open space than we realize (e.g. constitutional right to abortion), I have to hold on to the firmly -held conviction that some results are simply too much for the law to bear.

This result is one of them - there simply is no basis for the idea that an ex-president can hold and continue to possess documents (whether classified or not) from seizure by the executive branch (led by the current president) on the basis of executive privilege. That makes no sense whatsoever, it cannot be the result. It just can't.

I do hope you're right as I would like to believe that as well. I remember wanting to believe that Roberts was also right when he said we don't have Clinton judges, Bush judges, Obama judges or Trump judges, but judge shopping for desired (and delivered) verdicts clearly indicates that's not true. 75% may not be, but the the Republican legal establishment knows where the 25% are and the pipeline that's intact for them to get their desired legal results all the way to the SC. And they use it very effectively.

 

[coldseat]

To my point:

======================
....

That this judge would give Trump whatever he wanted was, sadly, not a surprise. She was appointed by Trump and confirmed after his defeat but before Democrats took control of the Senate in 2021. We’ve come to expect that if that’s how someone got on the bench, they’ll likely show themselves to be a Trumpist political operative in a robe, rather than an objective jurist.

This is our new reality. Nearly every political controversy will include a vital legal component, in which Republicans find a friendly Trump judge to grant whatever preposterous request they make, injecting the courts in place after place they have little or no business meddling.

In some cases (including this one) it might merely slow things down, giving the GOP time to press its advantage or avoid disaster. In other cases it will give Republicans an outright victory, on their policy goals or the procedures that help them win more elections. But we’re now in an era in which the courts are more political than ever.

This is not an accident, and while it suits Trump perfectly, it was not his design. He was the vehicle of a transformation planned and executed by the Federalist Society, the wider conservative legal movement, and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.). The plan was not just to install as many conservative judges as possible, but to politicize the courts in an unprecedented way.

That’s why Trump’s appointees were qualitatively different from those of previous Republican presidents. The Bushes and Ronald Reagan appointed lots of conservative judges, but they also tended to have substantial legal credentials. Even as they leaned toward conservative outcomes, they also maintained a foundation of respect for the system and the law — and they usually (though not always) had some shame, a desire to maintain a reputation as fair and objective jurists.

That is most assuredly not how the average judge appointed by Trump sees their role. Cannon’s ruling is the latest example, but we’ve seen others before. Back in April, District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle in Florida issued a nationwide injunction ending the mask mandate on interstate travel, on the ludicrous grounds that stopping the spread of an airborne virus by requiring masks on planes and trains was outside the purview of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Everyone knew what was really going on. Mizelle’s legal analysis was inane, but it didn’t have to be grounded in any reasonable reading of the law. All that mattered was that she delivered the outcome Republicans wanted.

....

This is our future as long as Trump judges remain on the bench. In every election, every issue debate, and every controversy, the first thing Republicans will do is prepare their lawsuits and start shopping for Trump judges who will be guaranteed to rule in their favor.

They won’t win every case; they did fail to get the courts to overturn the 2020 election, and even the right-wing supermajority on the Supreme Court will rule against them from time to time. But they got the judiciary they wanted, one dominated by hacks whose respect for the law will almost always yield to the GOP’s partisan interests. And they’re going to use it.

==============================

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/09/06/trump-judge-mar-a-lago-documents-grim-future/

 

[samiam5211]

Can the DOJ allow the special master to go forward, and still appeal the ruling?

Is there a way for them to avoid excessive delay (which is all Trump is hoping for), and still fight the ruling because it sets a bad precedent?

Personally, i would prefer allowing a bad precedent to stand over creating more delay in this case.

 

[BullSheetBuddha]

I know this is how it looks and I have no response to say it isn't.

In my heart, I still believe that the law matters and that while there is often more nuance and open space than we realize (e.g. constitutional right to abortion), I have to hold on to the firmly -held conviction that some results are simply too much for the law to bear.

This result is one of them - there simply is no basis for the idea that an ex-president can hold and continue to possess documents (whether classified or not) from seizure by the executive branch (led by the current president) on the basis of executive privilege. That makes no sense whatsoever, it cannot be the result. It just can't.

"That makes no sense whatsoever, it cannot be the result. It just can't."

Agree, but............. I'm very concerned .

 

[FullMonte]

Can the DOJ allow the special master to go forward, and still appeal the ruling?

Is there a way for them to avoid excessive delay (which is all Trump is hoping for), and still fight the ruling because it sets a bad precedent?

Personally, i would prefer allowing a bad precedent to stand over creating more delay in this case.

I really don't know why the DOJ would appeal this ruling. As silly and bad as it is, appealing will simply delay the process.

The Special Master isn't somehow going to make the presidential records and classified information that was taken from Mar-A-Lago disappear, so the actual evidence of a crime is still there. And, if the Special Master is allowed to review the seized documents, and removes anything that is privileged, that just takes away another avenue of "defense" for the Trump camp.

 

[coldseat]

I really don't know why the DOJ would appeal this ruling. As silly and bad as it is, appealing will simply delay the process.

The Special Master isn't somehow going to make the presidential records and classified information that was taken from Mar-A-Lago disappear, so the actual evidence of a crime is still there. And, if the Special Master is allowed to review the seized documents, and removes anything that is privileged, that just takes away another avenue of "defense" for the Trump camp.

I don't know. I understand the delay argument, but I think there is a potential issue with the special master deciding that something is covered by an ex-presidents executive privilege when that is a dubious claim to begin with.

The fact that the district judge pretty much stated that there even is such a thing in her ruling, I feel that's something that should be challenged by appealing. But I have no faith that the 11th circuit Trump judges would state such a claim is ridiculous and overrule her order. So I don't know if it would be worth it, but for different reasons.

 

[barbar]

So a judge appointed by the accused can stop an investigation into the same person? Something is seriously wrong!!

Agree 100. It's the same as "the sitting president cannot be charged with crimes." This guy is a master of insulating himself from consequences.

 

[BullSheetBuddha]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2022/09/06/trump-nuclear-documents/

"Document seized from Trump home described foreign govt's nuclear capabilities -Washington Post

WASHINGTON, Sept 6 (Reuters) - A document describing a foreign government's military defenses, including its nuclear capabilities, was found in the FBI's search last month of former President Donald Trump's Florida home, the Washington Post reported on Tuesday.

The Post report, which cited people familiar with the matter, did not identify the foreign government discussed in the document, nor did it indicate whether the foreign government was friendly or hostile to the United States."

 

[Optimus Prime]

"Document seized from Trump home described foreign govt's nuclear capabilities -Washington Post

WASHINGTON, Sept 6 (Reuters) - A document describing a foreign government's military defenses, including its nuclear capabilities, was found in the FBI's search last month of former President Donald Trump's Florida home, the Washington Post reported on Tuesday.

The Post report, which cited people familiar with the matter, did not identify the foreign government discussed in the document, nor did it indicate whether the foreign government was friendly or hostile to the United States."

The revelation that Donald Trump kept materials related to a foreign nation's nuclear capabilities puts intense pressure on the Department of Justice to bring charges against the former president.

FBI agents found those highly classified documents -- which many high-ranking national security officials aren't even aware of -- at Mar-A-Lago during a search last month, and MSNBC legal analyst Barbara McQuade told "Morning Joe" that prosecutors had to indict Trump for holding onto those top-secret government records.

"I think there are two things about this that are very significant," McQuade said. "One is, regardless of classification level, it is clear now that this relates to national defense information, and that's the language of the Espionage Act. So Donald Trump can claim to have declassified documents all day. He might even have been successful, and that would be no defense to the claim. The other thing that I think is significant about this is it makes it almost impossible for the Justice Department to decline to bring criminal charges."

McQuade said this situation called for strong action, compared with similar violations by other former government officials after they had left office...........

Mar-A-Lago nuclear revelations make it 'almost impossible' for Trump to escape charges: legal expert

 

[Optimus Prime]

for what it's worth

How can Trump argue that because the Judge was appointed by Bill Clinton that judge would have "virulent bias" against his case but a judge that Trump appointed wouldn't have bias for it?
================================================================

Former President Donald Trump tried -- and failed \-- to get his sprawling lawsuit against Hillary Clinton and other assorted political enemies before the same federal judge whose ruling in the Mar-A-Lago documents case has come under intense criticism.

The former president sued his his first presidential election rival in March, along with the Democratic National Committee, John Podesta, James Comey and many others, accusing them of conspiring to rig the 2016 election against him -- but his attorney chose to filed the case in the same South Florida federal court district where Judge Aileen Cannon sits, reports Politico.

Cannon, a Federalist Society member who was appointed by Trump in 2020, is the only judge in the Fort Pierce division, which is more than an hour's drive away from Trump's home in West Palm Beach, which has its own federal court presided over by two judges who were appointed by Barack Obama and Bill Clinton.

The lawsuit was assigned to the Clinton-appointed judge Donald Middlebrooks back in West Palm Beach, and his attorneys quickly filed a motion to disqualify him, complaining that his appointment 25 years ago by the lead defendant's husband amounted to "virulent or pervasive" bias against Trump's case..............

Trump tried -- but failed -- to put his racketeering suit against Hillary Clinton in front of Judge Aileen Cannon

 

[UriUT]

I know this is how it looks and I have no response to say it isn't.

In my heart, I still believe that the law matters and that while there is often more nuance and open space than we realize (e.g. constitutional right to abortion), I have to hold on to the firmly -held conviction that some results are simply too much for the law to bear.

This result is one of them - there simply is no basis for the idea that an ex-president can hold and continue to possess documents (whether classified or not) from seizure by the executive branch (led by the current president) on the basis of executive privilege. That makes no sense whatsoever, it cannot be the result. It just can't.

It's apparent that we must have faith in our judicial system. The alternative is terrifying. Yet we cannot be naive to the prospect that for the last two decades, one organization has a singular, machiavellian goal to dominate the courts. Whether that borders on seditious, anti constitutional ideas is to be seen. After all we had trump appointees ruling against him. At the same time, we have kavanaugh float the idea of executive privilege even after leaving office.

I believe that as a preventive measure in case the scotus does have any hint of siding with the traitor, Biden should threaten privately of a scotus expansion just as fdr had done.

 

[Optimus Prime]

I've been reading that the judge's special master ruling doesn't make much legal sense

I know there is an appeal process but is there anything more? Is there any process where the judge has to explain and defend her ruling in more detail?

 

[UriUT]

I've been reading that the judge's special master ruling doesn't make much legal sense

I know there is an appeal process but is there anything more? Is there any process where the judge has to explain and defend her ruling in more detail?

One way is for the dems to hold the house and impeach her. The matter of how she was appointed is suspicious. Her qualifications have been questioned. I have seen some complaints of her previous ruling lacking clarity.

 

[superchuck500]

DOJ has noticed appeal. I think this is the right move - there has been quite a bit of disagreement on law twitter about next steps, but I think there's so much patently wrong about the decision that appeal is the best choice. People cynically think that the 11th Circuit (probably second most conservative circuit) will rubber stamp the decision but I think they will be more thoughtful than that.

If the 11th Circuit reverses, Trump could appeal to SCOTUS - where Justice Thomas is the reviewer for the 11th Circuit (Thomas notably dissented from the Court's declination of the writ on the DC Circuit's executive privilege ruling on the J6 committee records request), but at the end of the day, Judge Cannon's decision is a substantial overreach of judicial authority and erroneous as to basic law. I just have to have faith that Trumpism hasn't so infected the courts that such a ruling would be allowed to stand.

 

[superchuck500]

 

[MT15]

I have zero faith in Thomas. I think it’s quite possible he should be impeached.

 

[Saintamaniac]

I have zero faith in Thomas. I think it’s quite possible he should be impeached.

I just have to have faith that Trumpism hasn't so infected the courts that such a ruling would be allowed to stand.

Chuck I want to have the same faith that you are struggling to have with respect to the law. Trumpist have drank the figurative kool-aid just like the people who followed Jim Jones. Those people gave their lives to Jim Jones. Trumpist have given themselves, their careers and their reputations to Trump. They have willingly offered them up to the alter of fascism. If this makes it to Thomas, he will ignore every scintilla of law he has ever learned or practiced and he will rule in trump's favor. His wife has real consequences for her actions and he will do whatever he can (legal and illegal) to protect her. If there is a way that he sees that his ruling can somehow help his wife, he will ignore the law. I believe this until I am proven wrong otherwise.

 

[bdb13]

DOJ has noticed appeal. I think this is the right move - there has been quite a bit of disagreement on law twitter about next steps, but I think there's so much patently wrong about the decision that appeal is the best choice. People cynically think that the 11th Circuit (probably second most conservative circuit) will rubber stamp the decision but I think they will be more thoughtful than that.

If the 11th Circuit reverses, Trump could appeal to SCOTUS - where Justice Thomas is the reviewer for the 11th Circuit (Thomas notably dissented from the Court's declination of the writ on the DC Circuit's executive privilege ruling on the J6 committee records request), but at the end of the day, Judge Cannon's decision is a substantial overreach of judicial authority and erroneous as to basic law. I just have to have faith that Trumpism hasn't so infected the courts that such a ruling would be allowed to stand.

Well this shirt's going to be fairly substantial in meaning then, whichever way it all goes.