|
HappyHippo posted:I assume freep is taking the Manafort news well The gist of the thread is "Manafort hasn't even been convicted of anything, why is he in jail?" Ignoring, of course, that it's incredibly common to keep people in jail (not prison) while awaiting trial. The next bitch is "he isn't even allowed bail!" But he *was* allowed bail, but while he was out he was trying to covertly contact witnesses in his own trial, so that violated his bail conditions and he's back in prison. Plus honestly you could make a case for not giving him bail because he's a multi-millionaire with massive overseas connections and is basically a textbook case of someone who might well be extensively prepared to flee to a non-extradition country. I like how this post both admits he violated bail, but then calls him a political prisoner. quote:
Holy poo poo, I am going to be amazingly upset if Trump starts pardoning people convicted in an investigation into himself. You would really think that in a normal country that would provoke a Nixon-esque downfall, but I'm not at all confident of that in the current situation.
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2018 23:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 17:22 |
|
|
TapTheForwardAssist posted:Holy poo poo, I am going to be amazingly upset if Trump starts pardoning people convicted in an investigation into himself. You would really think that in a normal country that would provoke a Nixon-esque downfall, but I'm not at all confident of that in the current situation. The only reason trump isn't doing this is because that would make them give up their 5th ammendment rights so they would all be right back in jail for perjury after they didn't testify in the russia case. Juliani floated it earlier today of course.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2018 23:25
|
|
|
That 5th amendment thing has never been tested in that way and since pardons by the president don’t work on state charges it may be irrelevant.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2018 23:33
|
|
|
I kind of want Trump to do something completely insane to see how freep would rationalize it. Like just one day saying "I pardon every crime committed before January 1st this year. Everybody gets out of jail and nobody can be prosecuted for anything that happened before that date." All criminal records are clean let's just start over."
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2018 23:33
|
|
|
True, it's a whole new world of pardons once trumps gets anywhere near someone invovled in the case.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2018 23:34
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:That 5th amendment thing has never been tested in that way and since pardons by the president don’t work on state charges it may be irrelevant. While it hasn't been directly tested, it is a precedent established by Burdick v. United States in 1915. A journalist refused to reveal his sources for leaks coming from the Treasury Department, so Woodrow Wilson gave a presidential pardon to eliminate his Fifth Amendment protections and force him to testify (for those not super familiar with how it works, the Fifth only protects you from self-incrimination so losing the ability to be imprisoned for your testimony also removes your right to not give testimony). When he still refused to testify on the basis that he didn't want the pardon, they threw him in jail until he coughed up a name. The Supreme Court ruled this to be illegal, establishing the precedent that a conditional or unconditional pardon cannot be forced onto anyone to revoke their Fifth Amendment rights. Anyone may reject a pardon or a grant of immunity in exchange for testimony if they strongly believe that maintaining their Fifth Amendment rights are a better option. There's a few ways this could go with Manafort depending on what the charges are and whether or not Trump issues a pardon: 1. If Manafort is being charged for state crimes, Trump has no power to issue a pardon at all. Manafort can continue to exercise his Fifth Amendment rights as long as he wishes and the government can continue prosecuting him as normal, including the potential of offering immunity in exchange for testimony against a bigger fish. 2. If Manafort is being charged for federal crimes and Trump issues a pardon that Manafort accepts, he will immediately lose his Fifth Amendment rights for those charges and can be compelled to testify under threat of perjury. 3. If Manafort is being charged for federal crimes and Trump issues a pardon that Manafort rejects, he will maintain his Fifth Amendment rights as long as he wishes and the government can continue prosecuting him as normal, including the potential of offering immunity in exchange for testimony against a bigger fish.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2018 23:56
|
|
|
Yeah but you can be charged by the feds, convicted for a fed crime, the charges by a state on the same facts for a state crime.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2018 00:26
|
|
|
Plinkey posted:The only reason trump isn't doing this is because that would make them give up their 5th ammendment rights so they would all be right back in jail for perjury after they didn't testify in the russia case. You think Trump is smart enough to think about that, or listen to his
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2018 00:53
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Yeah but you can be charged by the feds, convicted for a fed crime, the charges by a state on the same facts for a state crime. Not in New York State, apparently. Not entirely clear on that matter.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2018 00:59
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Yeah but you can be charged by the feds, convicted for a fed crime, the charges by a state on the same facts for a state crime. You can, which is why I specified the difference between federal and state crimes. If Manafort is being charged on both levels or just the state, a pardon from Trump does nothing to prevent his trial. If he's just being charged on the federal level, Trump has a Morton's Fork: let Manafort get convicted (or have the sword held over his head long enough that he starts considering flipping on him), or pardon Manafort to try and ensure his loyalty but open up the investigation to forcing him to testify.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2018 01:00
|
|
|
Dont worry trump can just pardon himself so none if this matters anyway. I mean the president has absolute power to do what he wants, right?
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2018 01:06
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:Dont worry trump can just pardon himself so none if this matters anyway. I mean the president has absolute power to do what he wants, right?
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2018 01:11
|
|
|
Ravenfood posted:There's a part of me that suspects Trump hasn't been moving to pardon people like Manafort because he thinks he doesn't need to because he can just pardon himself anyway. Manafort going to jail doesn't directly affect him so he probably doesn't even care. Or at least he thinks it doesn't.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2018 01:15
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:Manafort going to jail doesn't directly affect him so he probably doesn't even care. Or at least he thinks it doesn't. Well, neither did Arpaio. Trump appears to be using pardons as a reward for loyalty and a sign to his other allies that their loyalty will be rewarded with pardons in case they get caught in their corruption.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2018 01:20
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:Well, neither did Arpaio. Trump appears to be using pardons as a reward for loyalty and a sign to his other allies that their loyalty will be rewarded with pardons in case they get caught in their corruption. I think in the Arpaio case he figured he had something to gain on that one.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2018 02:17
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:Well, neither did Arpaio. Trump appears to be using pardons as a reward for loyalty and a sign to his other allies that their loyalty will be rewarded with pardons in case they get caught in their corruption. Honestly, I don't think Arpaio was really a cunning strategic decision so much as trolling the liberals for caring about Immigration and basking in the adulation of his base. I don't think it was meant to be any more complicated that that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2018 02:46
|
|
|
TapTheForwardAssist posted:Honestly, I don't think Arpaio was really a cunning strategic decision so much as trolling the liberals for caring about Immigration and basking in the adulation of his base. I don't think it was meant to be any more complicated that that. I don’t think he’s very cunning by rewarding loyalty. He sees someone supporting him in trouble and immediately makes whatever decision seems to be a good idea, even if it’s openly corrupt.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2018 02:51
|
|
|
I can easily see Trump's underlings waiting for a pardon that never comes. He's not exactly known for his loyalty or promise fulfillment.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2018 02:51
|
|
|
ponzicar posted:I can easily see Trump's underlings waiting for a pardon that never comes. He's not exactly known for his loyalty or promise fulfillment. He'll do it when and where he thinks it will benefit him and nowhere else.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2018 03:16
|
|
|
Plinkey posted:The only reason trump isn't doing this is because that would make them give up their 5th ammendment rights so they would all be right back in jail for perjury after they didn't testify in the russia case. That and that it only works on federal charges. If they're jailed on state he can't do poo poo edit; Ah, this has been handled, ok Onward then ToxicSlurpee posted:Dont worry trump can just pardon himself so none if this matters anyway. I mean the president has absolute power to do what he wants, right? lol, except he's got state and civil charges against him for multiple things right now including suits over his charity/money laundering operation. SocketWrench fucked around with this message at 15:01 on Jun 16, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2018 14:58
|
|
|
SocketWrench posted:lol, they get so pissed when she makes a joke about herself Because demeaning her is litterally their in group signal, the actual jokes dont matter.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2018 19:55
|
|
|
Holy poo poo, savagesuzie is still alive? I haven't seen her for a while.quote:To: rktman She seems to be doing... worse.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2018 23:03
|
|
|
I feel Susie should be paying royalties to the inventor of the parentheses.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2018 23:10
|
|
|
TapTheForwardAssist posted:I feel Susie should be paying royalties to the inventor of the parentheses. I think we all know who the (((inventor))) is.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2018 23:45
|
|
|
Psy ops "deep throat"
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2018 02:13
|
|
|
My God these GOP fucks are still mad about justice catching up with one of their criminal twentieth century presidents
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2018 02:16
|
|
|
That's significantly less coherent than I remember her insanity being.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2018 02:39
|
|
|
Someone was forcibly put on her meds and has only just managed to stop taking them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2018 02:46
|
|
|
I have no doubt that she posts on /r/greatawakening now. The thread for that is over here in case you didn't already know.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2018 03:17
|
|
|
Ravenfood posted:That's significantly less coherent than I remember her insanity being. The right has gotten exponentially more crazy as of late. So SavageSusie had to step it up.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2018 03:54
|
|
|
I was disappointed to see that Freep isn't ranting about the military transgender ban being pushed back yet again. A couple times I've had people ask me what I think of trans people in the military since I'm a Marine combat vet, and I don't want to get into a larger argument (that I have no background in anyway) about trans stuff in general, so I stick to military stuff and just say "hey, anyone willing to take a bullet!"
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2018 04:26
|
|
|
TapTheForwardAssist posted:I was disappointed to see that Freep isn't ranting about the military transgender ban being pushed back yet again. What are your thoughts on HIV positive soldiers? IMO that is rather more complicated.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2018 05:13
|
|
|
TapTheForwardAssist posted:I was disappointed to see that Freep isn't ranting about the military transgender ban being pushed back yet again. Freep actually doesn't give much of a gently caress about the specifics of LGBT rights legislation and court rulings - all they need to know is that Their Guy in the White House is on their side on the whole issue. That's probably largely the point of the attempted trans ban in the first place, just as a signal to the Religious Right that, hey, Trump still totally hates the gays just as much as you guys do, don't worry, give him votes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2018 05:19
|
|
|
Crunch Buttsteak posted:Holy poo poo, savagesuzie is still alive? I haven't seen her for a while. The fact that voting in a dictator hasn't resulted in the US becoming a conservative dystopia probably broke her more. She probably saw a big smart strong man who would outmaneuver the opposition at every turn because "Running a country is like running a business and Trump is the best". What she got was an inept pissbabyman that folds at the slightest hint of opposition and her brain cannot cope with that
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2018 05:24
|
|
|
Freep's take is that using Gmail is better than using a private email server? I'm not going to bother listing the reasons why I believe that's stupid, but have they given any reasons why they think it's not? Have any of them taken a stab at prividing technical/fact-based reasoning?
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2018 06:46
|
|
|
Potato Salad posted:My God these GOP fucks are still mad about justice catching up with one of their criminal twentieth century presidents
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2018 07:09
|
|
|
Veni Vidi Ameche! posted:Freep's take is that using Gmail is better than using a private email server? I'm not going to bother listing the reasons why I believe that's stupid, but have they given any reasons why they think it's not? Have any of them taken a stab at prividing technical/fact-based reasoning? Come on, you already know the answer.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2018 07:13
|
|
|
Veni Vidi Ameche! posted:Freep's take is that using Gmail is better than using a private email server? I'm not going to bother listing the reasons why I believe that's stupid, but have they given any reasons why they think it's not? Have any of them taken a stab at prividing technical/fact-based reasoning? Actually, yeah: With Gmail, you can’t actually permanently delete anything, because Google will always have a copy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2018 12:13
|
|
|
raminasi posted:Actually, yeah: With Gmail, you can’t actually permanently delete anything, because Google will always have a copy. So, better in *that* way, but also worse, because Google does not have security clearance.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2018 12:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 17:22 |
|
|
Veni Vidi Ameche! posted:Freep's take is that using Gmail is better than using a private email server? I'm not going to bother listing the reasons why I believe that's stupid, but have they given any reasons why they think it's not? Have any of them taken a stab at prividing technical/fact-based reasoning? They think it's better because their guy did it. That's it. If Hillary used Gmail they'd have hung her for it too and Gmail would be the most unsecure thing ever
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2018 14:03
|
|