It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Can a state or county court system jail an ex president?

page: 4
10
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 15 2023 @ 09:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: spacedoubt

originally posted by: RazorV66
a reply to: 1947boomer




Trump chose a very bad place to try to screw around with the election.


The crooked Liberals picked a very bad country to cheat in an election.
They won’t get away with it.


Wait til you hear about the next set of charges.
Trying to manipulate voting machines in Georgia.

I think he’ll get house arrest, not sure what will happen with the new charges.

No plan B for the GOP. All the eggs got humpty dumptied.

They need to take his passport before he heads to Russia.


Yes, because it's always easier to travel to other countries without your passport. DERP



posted on Aug, 15 2023 @ 04:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: greendust
I am asking because I do not know. It would seem to me that these supposed federal issues should all be tried in a federal system. My guess is that all of these local charges are because that way Trump will not be able to pardon himself when he wins the election (if we even have one).

Any legal type constitutional smart people here that know a real answer to this question?

I dont.


Yes. An ex-president is a private citizen. If they are convicted of a crime (murder, for example, or robbery) in a state by a state court, they have no immunity against being sent to prison. If it's a federal crime, then federal prison might be recommended. Famously, one Eugene V. Debs was convicted on charges relating to a worker's strike and ran for president from his jail cell :en.wikipedia.org...


And yes, we'll have an election. Never fear.

That said, let's acknowledge that the system is rigged in favor of the wealthy and influential, who often get off with lighter sentences or no jail time due to their lawyers and extensive plea bargaining. The question of where to hold Trump is an interesting one, though, and not one that's had to be explored in US laws before this.



posted on Aug, 15 2023 @ 04:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: spacedoubt




That this was an attempt to coerce people to aid in stealing a valid election.


That's gonna need some proof. And lots of it. Oh, and a tiny things call mens rea.


Again, I ask, is it within the purview of the POTUS to ensure that elections are fair, transparent and legal?


Nope. That's not part of his job, as outlined by the Constitution.



posted on Aug, 15 2023 @ 04:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Byrd

Finally an answer.

Article II of the US Constitution:

The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.



Where does the DoJ reside in our 3 branch system?



posted on Aug, 15 2023 @ 04:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: Byrd

originally posted by: greendust
I am asking because I do not know. It would seem to me that these supposed federal issues should all be tried in a federal system. My guess is that all of these local charges are because that way Trump will not be able to pardon himself when he wins the election (if we even have one).

Any legal type constitutional smart people here that know a real answer to this question?

I dont.


Yes. An ex-president is a private citizen. If they are convicted of a crime (murder, for example, or robbery) in a state by a state court, they have no immunity against being sent to prison. If it's a federal crime, then federal prison might be recommended. Famously, one Eugene V. Debs was convicted on charges relating to a worker's strike and ran for president from his jail cell :en.wikipedia.org...


And yes, we'll have an election. Never fear.

That said, let's acknowledge that the system is rigged in favor of the wealthy and influential, who often get off with lighter sentences or no jail time due to their lawyers and extensive plea bargaining. The question of where to hold Trump is an interesting one, though, and not one that's had to be explored in US laws before this.


I do not think you are correct here, he was never a president. He never had executive powers. One thing I overheard today is that a president cannot be charged for events that happened while he was president as it would make being the executive impossible due to the strain and time of legal proceedings. Also I heard something where it is possible if the president in question was impeached in both the house and the senate. Which Trump was not.

I fully expect this to go immediately to the Supreme Court if any jury finds him guilty of any charge.



posted on Aug, 15 2023 @ 04:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Byrd




That said, let's acknowledge that the system is rigged in favor of the wealthy and influential, who often get off with lighter sentences or no jail time due to their lawyers and extensive plea bargaining. The question of where to hold Trump is an interesting one, though, and not one that's had to be explored in US laws before this.


Where is Trumps light sentence? His lawyers and "accomplices" plea deals? Immunity?

See, you're right there, on the cusp of understanding where many of us are coming from.



posted on Aug, 15 2023 @ 05:07 PM
link   
a reply to: JinMI

Why do you think those 30 unindicted conspirators were let off the hook?



posted on Aug, 15 2023 @ 05:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Threadbare
a reply to: JinMI

Why do you think those 30 unindicted conspirators were let off the hook?


Evidence likely.

Seems the commonality among all allegations related to Trump.



posted on Aug, 15 2023 @ 05:36 PM
link   
a reply to: RazorV66

After you read the collusion, admissions btwn all 18 of his CO-Co's...get back to me. But give yourself a few days...LOTZ of Republicans indicted today...

And MR. Treason holds the title at 91 Federal charges, rt? (God, I look up to that man's American Ideals).....

So how you Republicans feel bout your crocked potted party now? (I hold no affiliation. Its all your problems.)

Now if someone would pick up Buffoon Biden...we'd be 50-50. With neither, we have a chance...
edit on 08235131America/ChicagoTue, 15 Aug 2023 17:38:51 -050038202300000051 by mysterioustranger because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 15 2023 @ 05:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: mysterioustranger
a reply to: RazorV66

After you read the collusion, admissions btwn all 18 of his CO-Co's...get back to me. But give yourself a few days...LOTZ of Republicans indicted today...

So how you Republicans feel NOW? (I hold no affiliation. Its all your problems.)

Now if someone would pick up Buffoon Biden...we'd be 50-50. We neither, we have a chance.....


Since you uh, have no affiliation, are you at all concerned at the sever lack of comparable charges on the other side? Are you at all concerned with the massive amount of charges to an ex president?



posted on Aug, 16 2023 @ 12:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: Byrd




That said, let's acknowledge that the system is rigged in favor of the wealthy and influential, who often get off with lighter sentences or no jail time due to their lawyers and extensive plea bargaining. The question of where to hold Trump is an interesting one, though, and not one that's had to be explored in US laws before this.


Where is Trumps light sentence? His lawyers and "accomplices" plea deals? Immunity?

See, you're right there, on the cusp of understanding where many of us are coming from.


Even this liberal knows that Trump has not been convicted of any crime yet. You don't toss folks into jail because you don't like them or because you have "evidence."

He has a lot of lawyers - something neither you nor I have access to. They can toss motions to delay trials till strategically convenient times (discussion and examples here) He can hire specialist lawyers (I can't afford one... don't know about you but I'd bet the number of folks here on ATS who could afford that is very very small).

So let's wait until he's convicted of a crime that carries a jail sentence before we start locking him up, eh?



posted on Aug, 16 2023 @ 12:33 AM
link   
a reply to: Byrd




Even this liberal knows that Trump has not been convicted of any crime yet. You don't toss folks into jail because you don't like them or because you have "evidence."


You're one of the few remaining liberals here who can articulate their points and have a standard mode of common sense. I wouldn't presume to think that you think he should be locked up.

My point is that even a guy like Trump has finite resources. While the gov't has infinite taxpayer funding.



posted on Aug, 16 2023 @ 01:08 PM
link   
a reply to: JinMI

Maybe we should start limiting the money to a percentage of what the other person has to make it fair?



posted on Aug, 16 2023 @ 01:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: yuppa
a reply to: JinMI

Maybe we should start limiting the money to a percentage of what the other person has to make it fair?


IDK the answer to the question.

Justice you can pay for is one thing.
Full weight of the US taxpayer is another.

Neither is actual justice.



posted on Aug, 16 2023 @ 03:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: Byrd




Even this liberal knows that Trump has not been convicted of any crime yet. You don't toss folks into jail because you don't like them or because you have "evidence."


You're one of the few remaining liberals here who can articulate their points and have a standard mode of common sense. I wouldn't presume to think that you think he should be locked up.

My point is that even a guy like Trump has finite resources. While the gov't has infinite taxpayer funding.



He may have finite financial resources, but he also has social resources that you aren't counting (that many poor people don't have.)

I don't know if you follow The Innocence Project but it's a really good example of what happens when you don't have money, resources, or a social group to fight for you when you go to trial. Not only does Trump have a social group that believes in him, but (significantly) this group includes lawyers, legislators, and people with Boatloads of Money.

He's got a "golden parachute" (or so we might say) that would soften any real attempt to railroad him.

This also means that the prosecution can't get away with some of the garbage that incarcerated those folks exonerated by the Innocence Project -- eyewitness misidentification, misapplication of forensic science, false confession, coerced pleas, inadequate legal representation, etc. Trump's lawyers are going to hammer the prosecution on each of these points.

So he gets quite a different class of legal treatment than Tyrone Day, a case here in Dallas that I was aware of over the years simply because of the work of the Innocence Project.

And once accused, Tyrone was tossed in jail - which is not something that happened to Mr. Trump.

And that's why I think our system is inherently biased. It's in need of reform, but that's the kind of thing that will come slowly.



posted on Aug, 16 2023 @ 03:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Byrd

Yes, justice that you can pay for.


Even still, hes up against the full weight of the us taxpayer in 3 seperate states and one district of columbia.

Any analog to this historically?



posted on Aug, 16 2023 @ 03:45 PM
link   
a reply to: greendust

Peeps really asking these questions. You should know whats going to happen. This is one huge red pill event. All theatrics to wake peeps up..

enjoy the show..




posted on Aug, 16 2023 @ 09:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: Byrd

Yes, justice that you can pay for.


Even still, hes up against the full weight of the us taxpayer in 3 seperate states and one district of columbia.

Any analog to this historically?


Actually, in today's news is the announcement that Giuliani can't pay his bills or his lawyers after all he's done for Trump. He's included in many of the charges plus others (being disbarred in New York, so he can't practice.)

I also did a little research on "most charges against a single person" and "most expensive trials" and Trump's affairs don't come close.

Longest criminal *murder* trial, the McMartin School trial (1990) over 2 1/2 years and that's the trial (Trum hasn't gone to trial yet.)

Largest fraud case - tossup between Bernie Madoff (better known) and Brockman but both involved billions of dolalrs

Most charges? Well, Terry Nichols is high on the list with 191 charges

Lawyer Kent Neal on Quora said he brought 171 charges against one individual (won the case)

Longest and most expensive trial (7 years) McMartin Preschool Abuse Trial

And those are just single jurisdiction trials. Wikipedia has a list of 'political trials', many of which I remember

Longest Congressional investigation of one person... that'd be Hillary Clinton on Benghazi.

Not sure which of those you intended (or something else), but as you see, oodles of examples abound.



posted on Aug, 16 2023 @ 09:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: Byrd

Yes, justice that you can pay for.


Even still, hes up against the full weight of the us taxpayer in 3 seperate states and one district of columbia.

Any analog to this historically?


...and more to his shame, Trump hasn't paid the lawyers who helped him with his claims of election fraud -- including Rudy.

BTW, I recommend that you take my word on this and son't read the article. The facts are there but it's phrased in a HEAVILY PARTISAN MANNER. (and I do mean heavily. It'll aggravate the bejeezus out of you. It was a convenient source, though.)



posted on Aug, 16 2023 @ 09:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Byrd

Star for the effort!




Actually, in today's news is the announcement that Giuliani can't pay his bills or his lawyers after all he's done for Trump. He's included in many of the charges plus others (being disbarred in New York, so he can't practice.)


I'm not sure why this matters. Are you happy about him going broke? Thanks CNN:



While the former mayor has declined in court to provide details of his financial state, his lawyers wrote this week that “producing a detailed financial report is only meant to embarrass Mr. Giuliani and draw attention to his misfortunes.”


So removing the murders, because that's not analogous, Madoff, a financial set of crimes, abuse? no.

Longest was Clinton which we know what that resulted in....

So the Quora link is Fox v. State Which is probably the closest analog. All I could find are appeals.





Not sure which of those you intended (or something else), but as you see, oodles of examples abound.



Those aren't examples of anyone in the political theater. Except for Clinton. Do we want to use Clinton as the analog?




top topics



 
10
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join



viewport: 1280 x 720 | document: 1280 x 13321