What precedent will prosecuting a former president set?

[Jayjay]

He was [president]. and that matters a ton more than you are appreciating.

Why?

Where in the Constitution does it discuss investigations on the President?

I’m not saying it doesn’t matter, but only because being president provides access to the means to try to overthrow the government. That MUST not be allowed.

No, it shouldn't, but like I've said umpteenth times, the solution to this is Impeachment. Our court system isn't designed to put the President on trial.

I have an opposite view. A former president shouldn't be immune from prosecution by the courts. But the political tool of impeachment, even though it mimics a trial, is not a real trial, and isn't meant for retroactively admonishing former presidents. It's for removal of current ones.

Or maybe you're talking about incumbents, in which case I agree.

 

[Elixir]

Or maybe you're talking about incumbents, in which case I agree.

Right. That’s the second time JH has referred to Trumpo as President. Freudian slip? I feel like “former” qualifies the term well enough to allow for prosecution. At least for SOME crimes.

But they hadn't [gone after past Presidents] up to now.

No? Does the term “birtherism” ring any bells?

 

[Politesse]

I don't get why the centrists still think the Trump crowd can be brought around. Just what exactly do they have to do, to prove that they have no intention of backing down or ceasing their attempt at insurrection just because Democrats are "polite" to them (read: ignoring blatant violations of the law)? They don't care. They want us to be dead, powerless, or silent. Not "nicer".

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

He was [president]. and that matters a ton more than you are appreciating.

Why?

Where in the Constitution does it discuss investigations on the President?

I’m not saying it doesn’t matter, but only because being president provides access to the means to try to overthrow the government. That MUST not be allowed.

No, it shouldn't, but like I've said umpteenth times, the solution to this is Impeachment. Our court system isn't designed to put the President on trial.

I have an opposite view. A former president shouldn't be immune from prosecution by the courts. But the political tool of impeachment, even though it mimics a trial, is not a real trial, and isn't meant for retroactively admonishing former presidents. It's for removal of current ones.

Or maybe you're talking about incumbents, in which case I agree.

I'm not arguing what I want it to be as much raising the issue of what it currently is... and currently, there isn't much law or judicial review (from SCOTUS) written down on how to prosecute the top guy in charge of executing the law in the US. As I've noted, this is complicated, untread territory, where Trump can almost take any issue up with SCOTUS, after a number of appeals.

Mueller knew this, and which is why he presented what was effectively an impeachment document.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Or maybe you're talking about incumbents, in which case I agree.

Right. That’s the second time JH has referred to Trumpo as President. Freudian slip? I feel like “former” qualifies the term well enough to allow for prosecution. At least for SOME crimes.

It matters because the actions took place when he was President. And the President has an absurd amount of leeway.

Which does lead to one question, why is Giuliani not in jail. He wasn't President, all he has saving his butt is the 1st Amendment... but he explicitly called for a "Trial by Combat" at the 'Let's go riot' get together. I got to think that is a slam dunk.

But they hadn't [gone after past Presidents] up to now.

No? Does the term “birtherism” ring any bells?

Birthers were before and during, not after. Trump didn't release documents of Obama Administration that I'm aware of. Of course, the Obama Administration was a tad bit lacking in controversy, even ignoring the two Presidencies he was sandwiched by.

 

[Patooka]

What precedent will prosecuting a former president set?​

Two things. Firstly it will very briefly cause all elected officials to consider their actions before engaging in rhetorical hyperbole.

Secondly, right wingers will use it to impede, obstruct and persecute anyone who has the temerity to disagree with them. Guaranteed, if Trump gets charged (and he fucking should) you will immediately see the likes of Tucker Carlson, Space Laser Lady etc shrieking for Biden to be put behind bars. They won't have any meaningful reason why but their followers will lap it up.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

I don't get why the centrists still think the Trump crowd can be brought around. Just what exactly do they have to do, to prove that they have no intention of backing down or ceasing their attempt at insurrection just because Democrats are "polite" to them (read: ignoring blatant violations of the law)? They don't care. They want us to be dead, powerless, or silent. Not "nicer".

It's interesting how few dems come to this realization. Must be a personality quirk. Keep acting civil in the expectation that the other person will do the same. Isn't that called insanity when you keep doing the same thing with the same conditions while expecting a different outcome? I don't practice quantum politics but apparently a lot of folks do.

 

[southernhybrid]

I think he should be tried, but because I believe that Trump is seriously mentally ill and since I don't believe in absolute free will, I'd be happy to see him put in a nursing home with a good memory unit. They could give him a little desk with a plaque that reads "President" and a television. He'd be happy and the country would be better off. Just get him away from the rest of us. Maybe he could plead insanity if charged. And, don't forget that Georgia is moving fast on his law breaking behavior here.

I've read that about 7% of Trump supporters have broken away from him since the hearings. So, there is hope for some of them. But, the problem is that Trump has changed an already far less than great party and made it a dangerous thread to democracy. We still have people like MTG and company to deal with. Most of them are young, so don't blame us boomers.

 

[Patooka]

I think he should be tried, but because I believe that Trump is seriously mentally ill and since I don't believe in absolute free will, I'd be happy to see him put in a nursing home with a good memory unit.

I really think it would be appropriate to put him in a cell, and the TV only shows tweets by Joe Biden read by Obama and Hillary. The amount of misery and suffering he has caused makes it impossible for me to have any sympathy for him. I can't do it.

 

[southernhybrid]

I think he should be tried, but because I believe that Trump is seriously mentally ill and since I don't believe in absolute free will, I'd be happy to see him put in a nursing home with a good memory unit.

I really think it would be appropriate to put him in a cell, and the TV only shows tweets by Joe Biden read by Obama and Hillary. The amount of misery and suffering he has caused makes it impossible for me to have any sympathy for him. I can't do it.

I understand, but as a person who cared for the mentally ill during part of my career, I have to have a little sympathy. It's impossible for me to have empathy for that psychopath, but I try to remind myself that moral development or lack of it comes from the brain. along with other environmental influences. His is obviously fucked up. I wouldn't mind seeing some of his enablers in prison or nursing homes, depending on age and mental status. We need to let people in government know that they are responsible for following the law and trying to keep our experiment in democracy going.

But, I fully understand the need for revenge, considering the horrific cult that Trump has produced, ruining lives and fracturing our already fragile democracy. I certainly wouldn't weep if he was behind bars.

 

[Toni]

I don't believe it's a problem for any American as long as it's not their guy/gal getting imprisoned for life - or executed. That's what trends tell me. Personally, I believe however the constitution says to handle it is what needs to be done. I think that's prosecution by the department of justice? Anyway, all this talk of Trump getting held accountable is out the door if Desantis (or any Republican) wins. He'll/They'll pardon Trump. Hell, it will likely be one of their campaign promises to get his looney ass base on board.

I would not be surprised if Biden pardoned Trump, to be honest.

I think that we are at or very near an inflection point.

1.If we do not prosecute Trump ( assuming that there really is all of the incontrovertible evidence there seems to be), we are setting a precedent t that if you are POTUS, you can do anything and get away with it.

2.If we do prosecute Trump, there is a very real risk that he will be acquitted. He should have been convicted both times he was impeached and was not, so, to me, there’s a real risk. If he were to be acquitted, see #1 above.

3. If Trump is tried and convicted, there is an increase, at least short term, of grace civil unrest. There is risk that the GQP will attempt to arrest Biden and bring him to trial on some made up charges, purely as a political move. Btw, lots of people think that Trump is being persecuted.

4. If Trump is tried and convicted and sentenced to some term in prison, there is risk that he will become a martyr. Worse if he dies in prison.

We still must try and convict Trump.

 

[Elixir]

He was [president]. and that matters a ton more than you are appreciating.

Why?

Where in the Constitution does it discuss investigations on the President?

Wait, what? Where in the Constitution are special forbiddances to prosecute ex-presidents? The founders didn’t consider that the office conferred any immunity whatsoever to ex-presidents.

I’m not saying it doesn’t matter, but only because being president provides access to the means to try to overthrow the government. That MUST not be allowed.

No, it shouldn't, but like I've said umpteenth times, the solution to this is Impeachment. Our court system isn't designed to put the President on trial.

Impeachment COULD be applied, but it could also be applied if no treason was committed. I submit that capital crimes are in a unique category to which no American is immune.

I have an opposite view. A former president shouldn't be immune from prosecution by the courts. But the political tool of impeachment, even though it mimics a trial, is not a real trial, and isn't meant for retroactively admonishing former presidents. It's for removal of current ones.

^ that.

Or maybe you're talking about incumbents, in which case I agree.

Right.

 

[Swammerdami]

Out of curiosity, what is the status of Queen Elizabeth II and other constitutional monarchs around the world? Can they be arrested and tried like ordinary citizens? If so, when did that change? Were 18th- or 19th-century monarchs subject to arrest and trial?

 

[Ford]

What precedent will prosecuting a former president set?​

Two things. Firstly it will very briefly cause all elected officials to consider their actions before engaging in rhetorical hyperbole.

Secondly, right wingers will use it to impede, obstruct and persecute anyone who has the temerity to disagree with them. Guaranteed, if Trump gets charged (and he fucking should) you will immediately see the likes of Tucker Carlson, Space Laser Lady etc shrieking for Biden to be put behind bars. They won't have any meaningful reason why but their followers will lap it up.

They're already doing this, and they've been doing it for years.

Do you know when the "stop the steal" website was registered? 2016. Trump was already claiming that primaries were going to be "stolen" as early as 2015. But wait...there's more!

For 8 years, the right wing hammered Obama with the "birth certificate" nonsense, and 40% of Republican voters believed (and probably still do) that he was born in Kenya. The bigger picture? Republicans and the right wing in America are of the opinion that any election they did not win is illegitimate, and will do anything to impede, obstruct, or persecute those who "stole" the win from them. They never considered Obama as legitimate, and did everything they could to de-legitimize him. When it became apparent that Clinton would run, they ginned up "Benghazi" and "but her emails!" and kept that circus going right up until (checks notes) a few weeks after she conceded the election to Trump. It was never about "justice for the families of the victims." It was 100 percent an attempt to damage her chances at winning.

If the GOP takes back the House in 2024, they absolutely will impeach Biden. Over what? They'll make something up. Will they have enough votes to remove him? No, but that's not the point. They want to be able to point to him as illegitimate, forgetting of course that Trump was impeached twice. If they take control of Congress in this round and add more state legislatures and governor's offices to their roster, they will absolutely try to overturn the election results in 24 if they don't get their way. Their premise is - and has been for years - "nobody but us is allowed to run the country." They - led by Trump and his cronies - led a failed attempt to overturn the 2020 election results. Had they succeeded, the 24 election would have been a sham. They failed, but have been studying the "game film" of their loss and adjusting their strategy so that it works next time.


As such, prosecuting Trump and anyone else associated with the plot is necessary. Will it be messy? Yes. Will it drag out for years? Probably. Will he ever see the inside of a cell? Probably not. But it has to be done, because if the right wing has their way, there will not be another chance. If Trump or DeSantis or someone else on their side gains back the White House, that will be the last legitimate election because they are going to make sure they never have to worry about losing again.

 

[bilby]

Out of curiosity, what is the status of Queen Elizabeth II and other constitutional monarchs around the world? Can they be arrested and tried like ordinary citizens? If so, when did that change? Were 18th- or 19th-century monarchs subject to arrest and trial?

Ask Charles I.

Of course, his trial was in the 17th Century, and followed years of civil war.

English monarchs since have pretty much done as they are told by parliament, so the question hasn't arisen.

 

[Politesse]

Out of curiosity, what is the status of Queen Elizabeth II and other constitutional monarchs around the world? Can they be arrested and tried like ordinary citizens? If so, when did that change? Were 18th- or 19th-century monarchs subject to arrest and trial?

It certainly happened a few times, though it was usually would-be usurpers like Lizzy and her family holding the keys, so the country seldom came out ahead after throwing a monarch in jail.

 

[Patooka]

They're already doing this, and they've been doing it for years.

I agree completely. What I should have said was they would be doing the exact same shit they've been doing for years, but now their reasoning is going to be because Trump got prosecuted. Same bullshit, new coat of paint.

 

[Elixir]

Republicans and the right wing in America are of the opinion that any election they did not win is illegitimate, and will do anything to impede, obstruct, or persecute those who "stole" the win from them.

True. And nothing that happens between now and November, or between now and 11/.24 is gong to change that (almost) unspoken conviction.

They never considered Obama as legitimate, and did everything they could to de-legitimize him. When it became apparent that Clinton would run, they ginned up "Benghazi" and "but her emails!" and kept that circus going right up until (checks notes) a few weeks after she conceded the election to Trump. It was never about "justice for the families of the victims." It was 100 percent an attempt to damage her chances at winning

There is little if anything undertaken by the GQP in the last 14 years that is not 100% about gaming the system for more power.

If the GOP takes back the House in 2024, they absolutely will impeach Biden. Over what? They'll make something up.

That applies NO MATTER WHAT HAPPENS TO CHEATO. There is no argument based on backlash to go easy on him.

Their premise is - and has been for years - "nobody but us is allowed to run the country." They - led by Trump and his cronies - led a failed attempt to overturn the 2020 election results. Had they succeeded, the 24 election would have been a sham. They failed, but have been studying the "game film" of their loss and adjusting their strategy so that it works next time.

Exactly. there is in my estimation, about a 70% chance that the '24 election WILL be a sham, and that America will become a fascist State.

prosecuting Trump and anyone else associated with the plot is necessary. Will it be messy? Yes. Will it drag out for years? Probably. Will he ever see the inside of a cell? Probably not. But it has to be done, because if the right wing has their way, there will not be another chance.

Agree 100%. And that is what I have been arguing.

If Trump or DeSantis or someone else on their side gains back the White House, that will be the last legitimate election because they are going to make sure they never have to worry about losing again.

Yup. If this cabal of fascists gets hold of the reins of government, they will hold onto it until and unless forcibly removed. The amount of blood required will depend on what happens in the next 100 days. I sincerely believe that the blood of one fat mango monster could save the blood of thousands, perhaps millions of others.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I don't believe it's a problem for any American as long as it's not their guy/gal getting imprisoned for life - or executed. That's what trends tell me. Personally, I believe however the constitution says to handle it is what needs to be done. I think that's prosecution by the department of justice? Anyway, all this talk of Trump getting held accountable is out the door if Desantis (or any Republican) wins. He'll/They'll pardon Trump. Hell, it will likely be one of their campaign promises to get his looney ass base on board.

I would not be surprised if Biden pardoned Trump, to be honest.

Good god no! Biden already refused to defend the protection of certain documents, which was already close to unprecedented. What Trump did was incite a riot over a knowingly fake scandal. There will be no pardon for Trump.

I think that we are at or very near an inflection point.

1.If we do not prosecute Trump ( assuming that there really is all of the incontrovertible evidence there seems to be), we are setting a precedent t that if you are POTUS, you can do anything and get away with it.

Well, that'd be the GOP, not we... he was impeached over his involvement in the January 6th riot. The GOP voted against it. THAT was the solution to this entire cluster. He would have been convicted and kept from holding office again. Or, the GOP should have had him resign or use that handy dandy Amendment to fire him. But the GOP really really loves the "stop the steal" money.

2.If we do prosecute Trump, there is a very real risk that he will be acquitted. He should have been convicted both times he was impeached and was not, so, to me, there’s a real risk. If he were to be acquitted, see #1 above.

The Attorney General will not take this to court if he won't get a conviction. So the only way this goes to court and Trump is acquitted is if no evidence is allowed to be presented. The crucial thing about a trial, it'll take forever. From courts that have jurisdiction, the AG's authority to prosecute the President, what is admissible evidence, who is allowed to testify, etc.... there is a grocery shopping sized list of delay tactics. And all of this assumes SCOTUS doesn't rule sedition as "protected speech" or "GOP President can do no wrong".

 

[Toni]

I don't believe it's a problem for any American as long as it's not their guy/gal getting imprisoned for life - or executed. That's what trends tell me. Personally, I believe however the constitution says to handle it is what needs to be done. I think that's prosecution by the department of justice? Anyway, all this talk of Trump getting held accountable is out the door if Desantis (or any Republican) wins. He'll/They'll pardon Trump. Hell, it will likely be one of their campaign promises to get his looney ass base on board.

I would not be surprised if Biden pardoned Trump, to be honest.

Good god no! Biden already refused to defend the protection of certain documents, which was already close to unprecedented. What Trump did was incite a riot over a knowingly fake scandal. There will be no pardon for Trump.

I think that we are at or very near an inflection point.

1.If we do not prosecute Trump ( assuming that there really is all of the incontrovertible evidence there seems to be), we are setting a precedent t that if you are POTUS, you can do anything and get away with it.

Well, that'd be the GOP, not we... he was impeached over his involvement in the January 6th riot. The GOP voted against it. THAT was the solution to this entire cluster. He would have been convicted and kept from holding office again. Or, the GOP should have had him resign or use that handy dandy Amendment to fire him. But the GOP really really loves the "stop the steal" money.

2.If we do prosecute Trump, there is a very real risk that he will be acquitted. He should have been convicted both times he was impeached and was not, so, to me, there’s a real risk. If he were to be acquitted, see #1 above.

The Attorney General will not take this to court if he won't get a conviction. So the only way this goes to court and Trump is acquitted is if no evidence is allowed to be presented. The crucial thing about a trial, it'll take forever. From courts that have jurisdiction, the AG's authority to prosecute the President, what is admissible evidence, who is allowed to testify, etc.... there is a grocery shopping sized list of delay tactics. And all of this assumes SCOTUS doesn't rule sedition as "protected speech" or "GOP President can do no wrong".

The only way to guarantee a conviction is to select jurors who are certain to convict. Which we can’t do if it’s a fair trial. And we cannot afford a trial that is not fair.

It’s sad but true that there really are people who could witness Trump assassinating someone in the middle of Fifth Avenue and still acquit. I’m pretty sure I know some and probably am even related to a few.