• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Merged So what's next for Trump?

To denote when two or more threads have been merged
https://www.rawstory.com/new-jersey-man-sues-trump/

Class action Lawsuit against Trump.

New Jersey resident Arnett Thomas has filed a federal class-action lawsuit against former President Donald Trump claiming there was an excess in deaths of Americans with his leadership during the COVID-19 pandemic.

unfortunately, I do not think it is possible to serve a civil lawsuit to a former or current president due to actions taken in the course of exercising presidential powers.
Think about every single family member of a wounded, killed, or missing soldier.... would they also have standing to sue the commander in chief for deploying their family member?

I don't think you can compare this lawsuit to soldiers. Soldiers basically sign their lives away when they become soldiers, they are no longer just plain citizens. They have far fewer rights than other citizens.

As far as the lawsuit itself, I think it will be thrown out due the no standing. I guess that would depend on who is included in the "class".
 
I think we've all been introduced into what's next for High Plains Grifter. He's gonna continue to grift because he has a gift for grifting. It's the oldest scam in the book and he's another natural.
 
I do not think it is possible to serve a civil lawsuit to a former or current president due to actions taken in the course of exercising presidential powers.

Maybe it depends on which actions they are.

This one, mishandled the C19 epidemic, probably not.
Plenty of other actions taken, presuming that his cronies would cover for him, probably so.
Tom
 
I do not think it is possible to serve a civil lawsuit to a former or current president due to actions taken in the course of exercising presidential powers.

Maybe it depends on which actions they are.

This one, mishandled the C19 epidemic, probably not.

Yeah, knowingly lying to the public about the seriousness of the pandemic after dismantling the apparatus previously created specifically to handle that pandemic, causing the deaths of some half million Americans.... no biggie. Not worth a civil suit. Probably best to just have him drawn and quartered.
 
I do not think it is possible to serve a civil lawsuit to a former or current president due to actions taken in the course of exercising presidential powers.

Maybe it depends on which actions they are.

This one, mishandled the C19 epidemic, probably not.

Yeah, knowingly lying to the public about the seriousness of the pandemic after dismantling the apparatus previously created specifically to handle that pandemic, causing the deaths of some half million Americans.... no biggie. Not worth a civil suit. Probably best to just have him drawn and quartered.

Well, as usual, a strawman argument.
Tom
 
Yeah, knowingly lying to the public about the seriousness of the pandemic after dismantling the apparatus previously created specifically to handle that pandemic, causing the deaths of some half million Americans.... no biggie. Not worth a civil suit. Probably best to just have him drawn and quartered.

Well, as usual, a strawman argument.
Tom

I actually agree with you that we shouldn't go after former presidents who took action (or no action) while being president. However, what did Elixir say that was incorrect?
 
Yeah, knowingly lying to the public about the seriousness of the pandemic after dismantling the apparatus previously created specifically to handle that pandemic, causing the deaths of some half million Americans.... no biggie. Not worth a civil suit. Probably best to just have him drawn and quartered.

Well, as usual, a strawman argument.
Tom

I actually agree with you that we shouldn't go after former presidents who took action (or no action) while being president. However, what did Elixir say that was incorrect?

It's the ignoring what I did say.

Plenty of other actions taken, presuming that his cronies would cover for him, probably so.
Tom

Trump did plenty of things that I consider worth post-presidential lawsuits and civil suits. But not the C19 thing.

[MENTION=236]Elixir[/MENTION]; is good at misrepresenting me. Clip off what I say and strawman me about something else.
Tom
 
I actually agree with you that we shouldn't go after former presidents who took action (or no action) while being president. However, what did Elixir say that was incorrect?

It's the ignoring what I did say.

Plenty of other actions taken, presuming that his cronies would cover for him, probably so.
Tom

Trump did plenty of things that I consider worth post-presidential lawsuits and civil suits. But not the C19 thing.

[MENTION=236]Elixir[/MENTION]; is good at misrepresenting me. Clip off what I say and strawman me about something else.
Tom

Misrepresenting you?
I'm not EVEN representing you.

I'm merely pointing out that Trump's dereliction of duty, negligence, deception of the public to make himself look good by disabling the pandemic preparedness apparatus that was gifted to him, then denying the existence of the pandemic, denying the efficacy of masks, knowing lying about the actual dangers of C-19 that he knew about - in fact bragged to Bob Woodward about knowing - it cost hundreds of thousands of American lives and countless more around the world.

My suggestion that he should drawn and quartered was facetious, of course, and I apologize if you didn't get that.
But don't pretend you favor actual retribution proportional to the damage he caused, because it would look something like that or worse.

In fact I think Trump is getting what's coming to him already. From what I've seen the screws are tightening on him every day. It might not be textbook "justice" but it does resemble karma.

https://ourworldindata.org/excess-mortality-covid
 
Misrepresenting you?
I'm not EVEN representing you.

You clipped my post, then quoted the rest.
Then made up a strawman argument.

Yeah, I think that's misrepresentation.
YMMV.
Tom
 
I do not think it is possible to serve a civil lawsuit to a former or current president due to actions taken in the course of exercising presidential powers.

Maybe it depends on which actions they are.

This one, mishandled the C19 epidemic, probably not.

Yeah, knowingly lying to the public about the seriousness of the pandemic after dismantling the apparatus previously created specifically to handle that pandemic, causing the deaths of some half million Americans.... no biggie. Not worth a civil suit. Probably best to just have him drawn and quartered.

Trump is on tape, this is not some derangement, saying he both knew this virus was very easily transmitted but also very deadly. He says faced with this knowledge he decided to downplay the danger and deliberately lie.

He turned not wearing masks and ignoring the evolving advice from experts into a political statement.

He is a mass murderer.

And this is not exaggeration.

It is in keeping with an undemocratic tyrant who tried to have members of Congress and his own VP killed.

We are lucky to have survived his insanity.
 
I'm not sufficiently versed in legal definitions to know if Trump's behavior is chargeable, but he did everything untermensche says, and more, much more.

He was anti-testing and said so explicitly -- spouting the insanity that more testing would only make the infection numbers go up.
He told people in Michigan and other states with governors who followed the science to "liberate" their states -- this at a time when angry, thuggish people were demonstrating outside statehouses carrying weapons.
He spread not just disinformation but purely crazy notions about the virus and its treatment. He revealed himself to be an uneducated man who had scorn for those who have actually mastered the information that he only pretends to have.
His negligence and 'house style' of having his aides work maskless led to the infecting of the White House.
After learning that he had tested positive, he (allegedly) traveled to a meet-and-greet with big donors and schmoozed with them, without a mask and without any regard for their safety.
He held super-spreader rallies again and again at which going maskless was some sort of macho identity boost -- and most of the nincompoops who came to cheer him came without masks.
He was against masks, then he was grudgingly for masks, then he made fun of Biden's mask...utterly a failure as a President, a leader, a man.
He refused to use his emergency powers to speed up production of PPE and vaccine research.
The U.S. didn't have to post the world's most catastrophic death numbers. Other societies got serious about covid, and fast. And they weren't just police states -- New Zealand basically whupped covid, and Australia got the whole country to double down on it. America had a 73-year-old toddler in the Oval Office, and he was responsible for the one of the most profound failures of government in our entire history. We're now approaching a death toll that will equal that of the Civil War. It didn't have to be this way. "Some day this will all go away, like a miracle." - DJT
 
 Depraved-heart murder

It ["depraved heart" murder] is the form [of murder] that establishes that the wilful doing of a dangerous and reckless act with wanton indifference to the consequences and perils involved is just as blameworthy, and just as worthy of punishment, when the harmful result ensues as is the express intent to kill itself. This highly blameworthy state of mind is not one of mere negligence... It is not merely one even of gross criminal negligence... It involves rather the deliberate perpetration of a knowingly dangerous act with reckless and wanton unconcern and indifference as to whether anyone is harmed or not. The common law treats such a state of mind as just as blameworthy, just as anti-social and, therefore, just as truly murderous as the specific intents to kill and to harm.
 
Yeah, knowingly lying to the public about the seriousness of the pandemic after dismantling the apparatus previously created specifically to handle that pandemic, causing the deaths of some half million Americans.... no biggie. Not worth a civil suit. Probably best to just have him drawn and quartered.

Trump is on tape, this is not some derangement, saying he both knew this virus was very easily transmitted but also very deadly. He says faced with this knowledge he decided to downplay the danger and deliberately lie.
... to prevent panic. He also said that, so proving intent gets harder there. It was BS, but also he didn't say he ignored the danger, to hell with the people.

He is a mass murderer.

And this is not exaggeration.
The mass is right, the murderer part isn't. He is guilty of mass neglect.

It is in keeping with an undemocratic tyrant who tried to have members of Congress and his own VP killed.
And you can't prove that in court, but the sure the hell seems a reasonable interpretation of his tweet about Pence failing him DURING the Capitol invasion.
...are lucky to have survived his insanity.
Not luck, there was an evacuation, and there was some security with guns pointed at invaders that saw to no politician getting hurt, though plenty officers were harmed and one killed.
 
... to prevent panic.

And only an insane idiot would buy that reasoning.

If it is deadly and contagious the only sane thing to do is make people very cautious and protective.

Downplaying it by lying does the opposite.

It kills tens of thousands of people.

Trump is a mass murderer. He lied to try to make the problem appear small for his own political reasons and lied about caring about a panic. Trump loved the panic at the Capitol.

Not luck, there was an evacuation

There were a bunch of psycho's running around with evil intent. IN the Capitol.

By sheer luck people were evacuated in time. Some of AOC's staff hid in place and the insane traitors tried to break open their door.

Those insane traitors only needed one hostage that wasn't a cop and they could have leveraged to stopped the process.
 
... to prevent panic. He also said that, so proving intent gets harder there.

So, now it falls under "never ascribe to malice that which stupidity is sufficient to explain"?
And indifference. He clearly only cared about his image and how the pandemic reflected on him. But one can't say his conversation with Woodward as simple him saying he ignored it because he didn't care. He was a bit more nuanced than that.
 
... to prevent panic. He also said that, so proving intent gets harder there.

So, now it falls under "never ascribe to malice that which stupidity is sufficient to explain"?
And indifference. He clearly only cared about his image and how the pandemic reflected on him. But one can't say his conversation with Woodward as simple him saying he ignored it because he didn't care. He was a bit more nuanced than that.

Wouldn't indifference imply negligence?
I have already expressed that there is no punishment too severe for that bumbling, incompetent, self-interested criminal buffoon. But one thing he does have is an overweening instinct for self-preservation. Avoiding liability is second nature to him. So "indifference" would also be hard to prove. Stupidity would be a safer plea, if his pride allows.

And only an insane idiot would buy that reasoning. [panic avoidance]

Surely you don't think insane idiots are in short supply in today's Q-ridden society.
 
Back
Top Bottom