|
he's just a dumb violent moron who has the power to speak over anyone he wants and get away with literal crimes, there's no mystery why cops like him
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2024 10:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 19:44 |
|
|
It’s pretty easy to grok why people who chose American-style law enforcement as a career might trip over their own goose-stepping boots to polish the balls of an autocrat, especially if that autocrat’s platform is normalizing saying the white supremacist part out loud 
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2024 10:36
|
|
|
Putin would be an idiot not to to pay up. If Trump wins, Ukraine will beg him for peace (or so Putin would think). The money coming from Putin would raise his status with republicans.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2024 10:43
|
|
|
BonesMcGuire posted:It’s pretty easy to grok why people who chose American-style law enforcement as a career might trip over their own goose-stepping boots to polish the balls of an autocrat, especially if that autocrat’s platform is normalizing saying the white supremacist part out loud I don't know if this is the same in the US at all but I once worked here in the UK with a former police officer who had left after becoming disillusioned about not being able to break into the bodyguard section. He said he wasn't a good fit for it. I asked him what he meant by that and he said "it's because I'm not a roided out aggro lunatic". So at least here in the UK it's the part of law enforcement that self selects for the most power tripping arsehole qualities. I can well understand the Trump agenda would be very attractive to them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2024 11:48
|
|
|
There's been news stories about the secret service getting in trouble on international trips for partying too hard with local prostitutes. They're definitely trumps kinda people. Hell, https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2012/apr/15/us-secret-service-scandal-obama
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2024 12:04
|
|
|
BigHead posted:Appealing a judgment generally pauses that judgement. Depending on the state and type of case the law can impose certain requirements before a defendant can appeal - and thus pause - a judgment. Criminal defendants, for instance, generally need to stay on bail conditions during their appeal. The requirement in NY civil cases is (apparently) to put the judgment amount in the court's escrow. If Trump can't do that, then he can't appeal, which means the judgment doesn't pause. He still gets to appeal, the stay on judgment simply isn't automatic. NY civil law has dealt with debtors running for the hills for 250+ years, its structured to make sure judgments are enforceable. Technically, his inability to post bond cant be used to deny him an appeal under the US constitution. NY Courts posted:To enter (record) the judgment, the person who wins the case must: People make so many weird assertions about how the NY court process works. It would be disastrously unjust if you couldn't fight a judgment just because you couldn't pay if you lost, it has nothing to do with the merit of the case. https://www.nycourts.gov/CourtHelp/
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2024 14:18
|
|
|
BigHead posted:Appealing a judgment generally pauses that judgement. Depending on the state and type of case the law can impose certain requirements before a defendant can appeal - and thus pause - a judgment. Criminal defendants, for instance, generally need to stay on bail conditions during their appeal. The requirement in NY civil cases is (apparently) to put the judgment amount in the court's escrow. If Trump can't do that, then he can't appeal, which means the judgment doesn't pause. This is good, thanks. Who transfers the bank account and building titles? The monitor?
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2024 14:19
|
|
|
Okay maybe I overstated the case, but I struggle to wrap my head around being willing to eat that much poo poo on a personal level from this guy being an odious rear end in a top hat. I know why cops support the guy, I guess I just assumed that direct, personal, daily interaction would be some sort of remedy rather than seeming to strengthen it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2024 14:22
|
|
|
Appeals don't typically pause criminal sentencing. You can ask for a sentence to be stayed pending appeal but such requests are almost never ever granted.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2024 14:38
|
|
|
small butter posted:Trump is not really in control of his businesses in NY but the monitor is, correct? So what happens when the deadline comes? Is the monitor looking at what to liquidate now or does that process start at the deadline? A good way to think about it is that the monitor can never do anything at their own initiative. They have fiduciary duty both to Trump and the people he owes money to, and cannot do anything that harms either party's interest (which covers basically everything they could possibly do), unless compelled to do so by the appropriate legal order. So the monitor basically has to twiddle their thumbs until the appropriate paperwork is delivered to them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2024 15:02
|
|
|
Tish James having fun it seems https://twitter.com/JoJoFromJerz/status/1761463040598224999
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2024 16:41
|
|
|
Barrel Cactaur posted:He still gets to appeal, the stay on judgment simply isn't automatic. NY civil law has dealt with debtors running for the hills for 250+ years, its structured to make sure judgments are enforceable. Technically, his inability to post bond cant be used to deny him an appeal under the US constitution. I think the issue here is that this is largely a distinction without a difference. The options are: 1. Trump fronts the money, either through a bond or by liquidating a bunch of poo poo to get the cash on hand. The judgement is stayed and the money sits in escrow pending him losing the appeal. 2. He appeals but can't (or won't) post the money. 30 days pass and the state starts cleaning out his poo poo to pay the judgement. 3. He appeals and the judicial system has some. Form of brain damage to give him a temporary stay. Anything other than the brain damage option is fundamentally the same. Trump has to come up with half a billion that he doesn't have.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2024 17:42
|
|
|
What's the source of all the assertions the USSS was ride or die for Trump? I remember hearing stories that they loathed him because of dumb poo poo he put them through
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2024 17:53
|
|
|
Angry_Ed posted:again he'd probably just do the "oh I'm not taking a presidential salary" thing he claims that he did for his first term. Trump once cashed a check for ten cents. Bank processing that check is like seven cents. If Trump cashed a ten-cent check that netted him three cents, I have doubts he withheld from taking a presidential salary.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2024 17:57
|
|
|
DarkHorse posted:What's the source of all the assertions the USSS was ride or die for Trump? I remember hearing stories that they loathed him because of dumb poo poo he put them through
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2024 18:12
|
|
|
I'm just a european person dumping into the thread with no real prior knowledge of US electoral processes, but what the gently caress is going on in the election? Can Trump just re-up for election even though he's under investigation for everything from stealing government docs to couping the last election? If so, is there any punishment he can receive that will make him ineligible for the office?
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2024 18:14
|
|
|
Dick Jones posted:Even if one were to spin these statements in the most positive light possible ("I'm being unfairly treated by a biased justice system just like you people"), he's basically acknowledging a core tenet of Critical Race Theory.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2024 18:19
|
|
|
You can run for the Presidency in prison. There's basically only 2 conditions to be president (35+ y/o and a natural born citizen) , plus a couple of other situations which bar an otherwise eligible candidate (term limits or barred by the insurrection clause)
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2024 18:20
|
|
|
Tias posted:I'm just a european person dumping into the thread with no real prior knowledge of US electoral processes, but what the gently caress is going on in the election? Being "under investigation" has no legal ramifications for Trump in terms of running for re-election, because A) the legal and political system presumes innocence until one has been proven guilty in a court of law; and B) the assumption was that the American people would be sane enough to weigh accusations heavily against a person's candidacy rather than simply screaming "TRUMP IS JESUS" and slamming the voting button. If this wasn't the case, then I guarantee you some Attorney General in some chud state would immediately open up investigations on Biden in order to get Biden declared ineligible. There is the possibility that if he is found guilty of supporting insurrection - the Georgia & DC cases - some states will declare him ineligible to appear on the ballot, and he may be considered ineligible due to the 14th amendment stating "No person shall ... hold any office ... who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States ... shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof." but there's a bunch of legal hurdles that the Supreme Court would need to rule on over whether Trump was 'an officer' or 'engaged in insurrection' because while the laws are clear to a bystander, they're not legally water-tight and clear. But all of that presupposes that Trump loses one of those cases before January and also the Supreme Court rules on those things prior to January, none of which is guaranteed. Or even necessarily likely.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2024 18:24
|
|
|
Tias posted:I'm just a european person dumping into the thread with no real prior knowledge of US electoral processes, but what the gently caress is going on in the election? There are actually very few situations in which you are absolutely forbidden from becoming president: -fail to meet the age and citizenship from birth eligibility criteria -term limited -impeached and convicted during a previous administration -confirmed insurrectionist (probably) “have a clean record” is not an official requirement, because nobody foresaw anyone would have the balls to continue to seek the presidency in such a situation 1 and 2 are requirements he indisputably clears. We tried 3 but his allies refused to convict. 4 is currently making its way through the courts You’d hope the voters would reject a candidate like this, but US culture is so rotten that a large minority still support him, enough to win every intra-party contest haveblue fucked around with this message at 18:28 on Feb 25, 2024 |
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2024 18:25
|
|
|
DarkHorse posted:What's the source of all the assertions the USSS was ride or die for Trump? I remember hearing stories that they loathed him because of dumb poo poo he put them through
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2024 18:52
|
|
|
Can Trump run for the presidency from exile in Moldova? Also didn't the Saudis give Kushner $2bil a couple of years ago, 400 mil is small change compared to that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2024 19:49
|
|
|
Tias posted:I'm just a european person dumping into the thread with no real prior knowledge of US electoral processes, but what the gently caress is going on in the election? Actually, no. Constitutionally speaking you can run for office from prison, and people have in the past. The founders were afraid the criminal power would be misused to prevent legitimate candidates from running. There's not really a way, in a democracy, to prevent a candidate that 45% of the country wants to be president from running for the office, especially when that 45% has almost all the money. The problem is that 45% of the nation are horrible people who think Trump is an ideal to look up to and therefore want him to be their leader.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2024 20:00
|
|
|
haveblue posted:There are actually very few situations in which you are absolutely forbidden from becoming president: Just for arguments sake in a democracy Murgos fucked around with this message at 21:01 on Feb 25, 2024 |
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2024 20:12
|
|
|
DarkHorse posted:What's the source of all the assertions the USSS was ride or die for Trump? I remember hearing stories that they loathed him because of dumb poo poo he put them through One thing of note is that dozens of USSS agents destroyed text messages from Jan 6th after they were ordered to preserve them. The excuse given was flimsy and unbelievable.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2024 20:44
|
|
|
Tias posted:I'm just a european person dumping into the thread with no real prior knowledge of US electoral processes, but what the gently caress is going on in the election? Being accused of a crime, even an election-related crime, is not a disqualifying factor for office. Even if he were to be convicted of a crime, that still wouldn't be disqualifying. There's two problems here, generally. The first is that there are very few methods to disqualify a president, they're all difficult to use by design, and they've all been hardly ever used so there's a lot of ambiguity around them. The second and most important problem is that all of those methods allow a considerable amount of flexibility from the people who'd have to make the decision about whether or not to invoke those methods. And in practice, nobody wants to take on the controversy of disqualifying a leading presidential candidate. As politically disastrous as a Trump victory might be, taking the unprecedented step of disqualifying Trump while he has a credible shot at winning wouldn't be all that much better. While there were a number of measures originally placed in the Constitution to allow the political establishment to override the will of the people in one way or another, in practice pretty much all of those measures have been eroded away by the political establishment's reluctance to go too far in directly defying the will of the voters. And honestly, I don't really think that's actually a bad thing! It just means we shouldn't hope for the political elites to step in and overturn the results of a basically fair election in order to save us from ourselves.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2024 20:48
|
|
|
Young Freud posted:Trump once cashed a check for ten cents. Bank processing that check is like seven cents. His press sec used to declare which charity he donated his salary to that quarter. They could of lied but your going to get caught out quickly doing this.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2024 00:07
|
|
|
haveblue posted:-impeached and convicted during a previous administration To be prevented from running you have to have the penalty of being barred from future office tossed on by the Senate. Simple removal from Office is the default of a conviction. knox_harrington posted:Can Trump run for the presidency from exile in Moldova? As long as you have 14 years of residency within the US, and are otherwise eligible, you can run from anywhere in the world. We insist on the lowest bars possible to become the most powerful person in the world for 2-10 years.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2024 00:13
|
|
|
What's that residency requirement? Isn't it "natural born citizen"?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2024 00:40
|
|
|
mobby_6kl posted:What's that residency requirement? Isn't it "natural born citizen"? The order of qualifications is Article 2 Section 1 -Natural Born Citizen/Citizen at time of the adoption of the Constitution -Age 35+ -Been 14 years a resident of the United States 14th Amendment -Not a traitor 20th Amendment -Not having served 2 terms already
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2024 00:49
|
|
|
what was the process for becoming a citizen before the constitution was adopted?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2024 01:21
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:what was the process for becoming a citizen before the constitution was adopted? Descendants of the English (and English-adjacent demographics) were full subjects of the Crown with full rights from birth, for everyone else it depended on the colonial charter and that week's lunch menu in Parliament but it was generally a pain in the rear end to "naturalize". Permanent residency was easier. In 1790 the new nation made all-ish free white people citizens.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2024 01:31
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:what was the process for becoming a citizen before the constitution was adopted? Depends on the State, since before the Constitution we were under the Articles of Confederation. The reference to citizens in the Articles is " the free inhabitants of each of these states, paupers, vagabonds and fugitives from Justice excepted, shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of free citizens in the several states" Given the state of records and such at the time, probably have shown up a couple years ago, looked white, and been "respectable" enough for the community to not run you out on a rail. The first actual definition I could find is from the Nationality Act of 1790 which says: White(1790s definition) dudes who had been living in the US for at least 2 years, and their children who were under 21.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2024 01:48
|
|
|
Very wise of the founders to foresee the menace of anchor babies and ban them from being president
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2024 01:58
|
|
|
haveblue posted:Very wise of the founders to foresee the menace of anchor babies and ban them from being president Some people's outrage over "anchor" babies baffles me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2024 02:19
|
|
|
haveblue posted:Very wise of the founders to foresee the menace of anchor babies and ban them from being president In context the UK has a pretty long history of having non-British Monarchs.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2024 02:22
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:what was the process for becoming a citizen before the constitution was adopted? Before 1790, there was no such thing as US citizenship. Each state had its own citizenship laws, and each state was supposed to treat other states' citizens equally. If that sounds stupid, keep in mind the idea of national citizenship was still pretty new and weird at the time. The idea of citizenship as a formal legal institution had mostly faded away in the medieval era, absorbed into feudalistic concepts in which you would be a subject of a ruler (rather than a citizen of a state), and only reemerged with the rise of increasingly centralized states in the early modern era, not too long before the American Revolution.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2024 02:53
|
|
|
Gyges posted:The reference to citizens in the Articles is " the free inhabitants of each of these states, paupers, vagabonds and fugitives from Justice excepted, shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of free citizens in the several states" Is it too late to have Trump declared a vagabond and retroactively strip him of his citizenship? I guess he’ll be a pauper soon too, so we’ve got options.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2024 04:02
|
|
|
Thanks for the good answers! I realize that you don't want petty barriers on criminal record for the presidency, I just figured that, maybe, somehow, the whole "ordering congress stormed" thing might have kicked off a censuring clause of some kind or other.Hieronymous Alloy posted:Actually, no. Constitutionally speaking you can run for office from prison, and people have in the past. I pray nightly for zombie Eugene Debs to return and lead your people!
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2024 07:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 19:44 |
|
|
Tias posted:Thanks for the good answers! I realize that you don't want petty barriers on criminal record for the presidency, I just figured that, maybe, somehow, the whole "ordering congress stormed" thing might have kicked off a censuring clause of some kind or other. In theory it does, on the basis that ‘insurrection’ is a disqualifier. In practice it does not because everything is entirely partisan and facts don’t matter.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2024 07:27
|
|
