368
submitted 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) by spaghettiwestern@sh.itjust.works to c/politics@lemmy.world

Should Donald Trump fail a second time to be re-elected he faces the very real possibility of jail time and massive financial penalties due to the sheer volume of criminal cases and civil lawsuits that are on hold until after the election.

That is the opinion of Syracuse University law professor Greg Germain who explained in an interview with Newsweek that the former president's only path to get out from under the federal cases he now faces is to beat Vice President Kamala Harris in less than two weeks and then push the Department of Justice to drop the cases filed against him.

As Germain stated, the multiple federal cases Trump is facing are solid and his only path to victory may be having them shut down.

Newsweek source: https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-legal-cases-georgia-washington-florida-new-york-stormy-daniels-chutkan-cannon-1974406

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Buffalox@lemmy.world 181 points 1 week ago

criminal cases and civil lawsuits that are on hold until after the election.

Why are they on hold? It's insane it's taken so long to push those cases, and it's even more insane if they are on hold.
Trump is a normal citizen, and shouldn't enjoy special privileges.

Except USA is no-longer a country of law, it's a corrupt oligarchy.

[-] granolabar@kbin.melroy.org 51 points 1 week ago

Always has been but normal people just finally starting to understand how bad it really is.

Modern oligarchs dont even pretend anymore and they dont have since peasants are fighting each. They dont care who wins elections for the most part as they will mostly get what they want either way

[-] farngis_mcgiles@sh.itjust.works 16 points 1 week ago

Except USA is no-longer a country of law, it's a corrupt oligarchy.

it always has been lol originally only white property owners could vote

[-] crusa187@lemmy.ml 14 points 1 week ago

Merrick Garland is a failure of epic proportions. It is a small silver lining that the Repugs blocked his Supreme Court nomination, not that their picks were better.

[-] Lets_Eat_Grandma@lemm.ee 11 points 1 week ago

Except USA is no-longer a country of law, it’s a corrupt oligarchy.

It's always been this way. The internet just does a better job of propagating information about it.

[-] Buffalox@lemmy.world 29 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

No, Nixon stepped down because of Watergate, you won't see similar honesty from Republicans today.
They are exploiting the judicial system, and to Prosecute Trump for things he did in the open as president to enrich himself and his family isn't pursued, even now after 8 years.
After Nixon the Republicans decided to try to control the courts and the political narrative, so they never would lose a case either legally or in the public eye like Watergate again.
Republicans have been systematically undermining USA for 5 decades now.

It's way past the time to stop it, If Harris doesn't win, and start the process towards legal and political normalcy, it could easily be to late.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Wojwo@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 week ago

I get the frustration, but I also get where the authorities are coming from. Imagine if precident gets set that a political candidate can be mired down in lawsuits, regardless if they're plausible or not. Then someone like trump comes along and says cool that worker great against me, I'll just throw a shit ton of made up lawsuits and cases against all my future opponents.

[-] jettrscga@lemmy.world 26 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Except that he's explicitly choosing to be a political candidate for the purpose of avoiding the lawsuits. A lot of these allegations occurred before he announced he was re-running, and then the lawsuits got put on hold.

Your scenario creates a method for anyone to delay consequences by running for office. Although we both know it wouldn't really work for anyone. Trump gets his special treatment.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Buffalox@lemmy.world 17 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

No that's a false narrative, the criminal cases are based on public prosecutors running them.
What you are claiming is for civil suits, of which a couple have been settled, despite obstruction attempts by Trump.
If it gets to a point where a politician can ask public prosecutors to put opponents in jail, USA has long ceased to be a democracy.

Trump is already a convicted criminal, and cannot vote in several states, still he can run for president, and enjoy privileged treatment.
Where an ordinary person voting because she was told she could, got 5 years prison for voter fraud!

[-] Volkditty@lemmy.world 12 points 1 week ago

In your scenario, do you imagine that all the Trump-appointed prosecutors and the Trump-appointed judges will willingly delay the cases of Trump's "enemies of the state" until after the election out of some respect for the sanctity of the democratic process?

It is a horrible, dangerous precedent to say we can't justly hold the guilty accountable because some bad actor in the future may unjustly hold the innocent accountable.

[-] orcrist@lemm.ee 6 points 1 week ago

Not everything is on hold. The dates and deadlines are simply not right now. Lawyers are preparing motions and the like in the background. Work continues. Of course that varies by case.

[-] riodoro1@lemmy.world 71 points 1 week ago

Why exactly are they on hold until the election? Shouldn’t it be like really important to determine if he’s guilty before they crown him?

[-] linearchaos@lemmy.world 33 points 1 week ago

Corruption, pure and simple corruption.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] postmateDumbass@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago

The humans who implement the judicial system are likely fearful of the purge that would come following a Trump victory.

I felt the same for a long time, but as much as I hate to admit it, it does kind of make sense in an abhorrent kind of way.

The hierarchy in a democracy is supposed to go...

Voting Public ➡️ Representatives ➡️ Laws ➡️ Courts ➡️ Rulings

That being the case, a Court shouldn't really hear cases that might undermine the will of the Voting Public.

If courts are empowered by the Voting Public, then a Court should not be in a position to make a Ruling the Voting Public does not want, despite that Ruling being correct in the context of the Law.

Another way of saying the same thing, is that if the Voting Public want's Trump to have a fair trial they would obviously not elect him as President.

[-] AAA@feddit.org 21 points 1 week ago

I understand your viewpoint, but disagree.

By that argument any criminal ever could argue against prosecution because they intend to run for a public office. Ridiculous exaggeration of course, but if Trump gets this chance, everyone else should too.

load more comments (18 replies)
[-] riodoro1@lemmy.world 15 points 1 week ago

Well, if the voting public has ultimate say than why are there rules on who can become president in the first place?

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] postmateDumbass@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago

While you make a point to consider, an educated and informed electorate is bedrock to a democracy.

Maybe the results of the Discovery process should be public record before a vote.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] linearchaos@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago

Another way of saying the same thing, is that if the Voting Public want’s

If winning the vote entailed an actual public majority, you might have some argument there. But that's not what we have.

load more comments (21 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] SeanBrently@lemm.ee 53 points 1 week ago

How many times over the last 4 years have I been told "Oh, they really got him now!" Do any wealthy politicians face consequences for the shady stuff they do( I include democrats in this category)?

And then I think about George Floyd who tried to buy a pack of smokes with a phony $20, and possibly didn't even know it was counterfeit, but was killed shortly thereafter.

This is not the America I want

[-] Wiz@midwest.social 6 points 1 week ago

Four out of the past eleven governors of Illinois did prison time. I think most of those were Democrats.

[-] SeanBrently@lemm.ee 4 points 1 week ago

Well that's something I suppose.

[-] jonne@infosec.pub 4 points 1 week ago

Yeah, how is being ahead in the polls, with an inherent electoral college advantage, a Congress that's willing to bend the rules and a supreme court that thinks laws can just be changed depending on the court case 'having your back against the wall'?

Even if he loses the election he's still going to be able to pay lawyers to keep him out of jail until he ~~chokes on a Big Mac~~ dies of natural causes.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] grue@lemmy.world 43 points 1 week ago

He should already have been in prison by now!

[-] octopus_ink@lemmy.ml 39 points 1 week ago

I for one am livid that I'll have to wait until after the election to see the disappointing wrist slaps he might get from whichever cases don't get sabotaged by sympathetic judges.

[-] espentan@lemmy.world 11 points 1 week ago

It really is outrageous.

I suppose "I'm running for president, let me go" is the new thing to say if you don't feel like going to prison right away. /s

[-] chuckleslord@lemmy.world 17 points 1 week ago

Trump, his back against the wall.

The Tamarian phrase for important things that need to happen but won't happen in time.

[-] fluxion@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Asafum@feddit.nl 10 points 1 week ago

We don't get to have nice things.

Not only is he going to win, by ratfuckery or otherwise, he's going to jail people like Kamala and Schiff for made up nonsense... We sat through almost a decade of bullshit delays and everybody treating Trump like a king, but he's going to have his sycophants lay the hammer down immediately on his opponents...

I really really really really hope I get proven wrong...

[-] Sam_Bass@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

all thats needed to make that image sweeter is a blindfold, a cigarette, and a line of 9 infantrymen with rifles loaded and ready

[-] BeatTakeshi@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago

...and the soap is on the floor

[-] JustZ@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

I wish it was his brain.

[-] orcrist@lemm.ee 4 points 1 week ago

The information is true but the article is thin. There's no new information or interpretations in it.

[-] jaggedrobotpubes@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

Desperation and weakness linked to shittiness.

Vote.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 26 Oct 2024
368 points (97.7% liked)

politics

19097 readers
4642 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS