|
sebmojo posted:do you understand that if you can be sentenced to death by your political foes that losing power is then tantamount to suicide? So you might as well stage a coup? the romans understood the poo poo out of this, and that was some time ago. To be fair, Trump was prepared to stage a coup anyway, so that's a bit baked in I don't know why I'm being fair though as the idea of such a prosecution is nonsensical.
|
#
¿
Jul 8, 2022 06:40
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 18:46 |
|
|
Uglycat posted:but if there is no standard that can be met, why make it a crime at all? The law often doesn't make sense. It doesn't have to. It's the law.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 8, 2022 06:53
|
|
|
Uglycat posted:th. As a practical matter, he has the right to a jury trial, and assuming competent counsel, he will almost always be able to find at least one CHUD to hang any jury. More importantly there isn't enough time to convict him before the next election. He'd be able to bond out before trial and still campaign, and any case would take st least two years to get to trial. Once in office he can order any federal prosecution to end and he can claim federal immunity against state prosecutors. The time to charge him with anything was February 2021. It's too late now.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 8, 2022 06:57
|
|
|
It means he wants to go full sovcit and poo poo up thr hearings and mo they shouldn't allow it.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 8, 2022 19:37
|
|
|
In the abstract, there is a certain bizarrerie to the concept of punitive damages, in a civil trial, which accrue to the injured party, not the State. It's the way the law has evolved, and it's often necessary to balance out the inadequacy of so called "actual damages" awards, but more liberal actual damages laws coupled with punitive damages being assessed by the state in separate criminal proceedings would make more "sense", inasmuch as the legal system ever makes sense. Of course that's not why Texas has such low punitive caps. Texas caps punitives because he people who pay punitives all vote Republican and trial lawyers vote Democrat.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 5, 2022 17:53
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:There's no way he wouldn't have blabbed about it at one of his rallies if he knew about it. Just because he took it doesn't mean he read it.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 9, 2022 11:48
|
|
|
cr0y posted:Why would they take them just to return them when trump threw a tantrum? Stamp "not valid" on them
|
|
#
¿
Aug 16, 2022 02:30
|
|
|
Yeah Trump doesn't even know what's in the boxes. It's just his cool stuff he took to show off.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 16, 2022 12:34
|
|
|
Repealing the act now wouldn't make Trump's conduct retroactively legal then anyway. Not unless it was repealed retroactively. Which would mean exonerating assange, manning, winner, etc.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 16, 2022 20:28
|
|
|
Uglycat posted:I'm not asking how the courts would handle a legal argument that he remains president; The actual answer to this is that if he keeps this up after he's been charged with something he could face additional charges of obstruction of justice and / or contempt of court depending on who he pissed off more, the prosecutor or the judge, and whether or not the prosecutor or judge wanted to bother.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2022 00:06
|
|
|
Murgos posted:With the news that DoJ subpoenaed NARA months ago for all White House documents requested by the J06 committee and the recent search warrant and that Giuliani is a target of the Georgia investigation I’m past ‘will Trump be indicted’ and now I’m now at ‘when Trump is indicted’. I don't think it's going to be possible to avoid that.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 18, 2022 12:55
|
|
|
Eh, it makes a certain amount of sense to try to claw back whatever you can. It will almost certainly fail but you still make the attempt because it isn't wholly frivolous and maybe you buy your client some time. From a defense attorney standpoint this is a play worth making, especially if you're billing by the hour. It probably won't work but best case it inconveniences the prosecution by taking away copies of things and worst case it shows the client you're trying.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2022 18:33
|
|
|
Dr. Faustus posted:Trump must have his SS protection and they cannot join him in jail. We have to house arrest him or something like that. They can hang out right outside the cell like any other guards
|
|
#
¿
Sep 3, 2022 01:10
|
|
|
Any given white male congressman mightve been able to blend in or might have gotten lynched. Mobs aren't predictable.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2022 19:46
|
|
|
Space Cadet Omoly posted:Why is a guy currently on trial allowed to go to a foreign country on a whim? It's a civil trial only. He can't go to jail on this. Worst case is he has to pay money to Carroll for calling her a liar.
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2023 01:47
|
|
|
cr0y posted:He's 100% not going to give a gently caress and do whatever he wants irt evidence and social media and I doubt he will suffer any consequences for it. His takeaway will be "I was acquitted of rape. She was lying about the rape. They want me to be a rapist but I'm not folks I'm not they're all liars."
|
|
#
¿
May 9, 2023 21:15
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:
This is not a criminal conviction. It is a civil judgment. There's a very big difference between the two. He has not been convicted at all.
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2023 03:03
|
|
|
It varies, but generally speaking, the winning party can go to court and get a lien against property the lower owns, plus collection costs. If you have no property to force the sale of via lien, then *shrug* no blood from a stone.
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2023 03:21
|
|
|
The problem with the "Trump is doing pro wrestling" analysis is that nobody gets to chokeslam him so he'll stop talking.
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2023 01:25
|
|
|
Staluigi posted:Every time I get through some gassed up "this is HUGE legal trouble for trump, this is IMMEDIATELY prosecutable, it is one TRILLION percent illegal according to spengwicker county v. a box of Spencer's Gifts novelty penis pasta" article, I'm like great all you did is further reinforce how difficult it is to conclude he doesn't benefit from a clearly different system and standard of legal accountability to be able to still be out shittin on his gold toilet after over half a decade of repeatedly stocking up on felony bullshit advertised clearly on tv Jean Carroll has bigger balls than any prosecutor in the nation. Nothing is holding them back that didn't apply to her, worse.
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2023 18:18
|
|
|
V-Men posted:Besides the fact that the burden of proof for criminal prosecutions is higher than civil suits? The burden of proof is not what's holding any of these back. Many of Trump's crimes were committed in public, often on video in front of large crowds, and he usually confesses them when asked because he is incapable of admitting that anything he did might have been wrong. The issue is prosecutorial cowardice. See, e.g., https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/23/nyregion/trump-investigation-felony-resignation-pomerantz.html. Prosecutors aren't willing to roll the dice on a case they *might* lose, and any prosecution of Trump is a *might*-lose case because you can always end up with a chud or two on the jury who wouldn't convict him if an angel came down from heaven into the courtroom with a flaming sword to testify. Hieronymous Alloy fucked around with this message at 12:11 on May 15, 2023 |
|
#
¿
May 15, 2023 12:05
|
|
|
Cimber posted:When you come at the king you best not miss. --Omar Little That, and there's a non-trivial chance that some crazed moron would try to assassinate the prosecutor. But, like, that's the job. Have some courage. The answer to this problem is multiple parallel prosecutions; only one of them has to win to put him away for the rest of his life. But each individual prosecutor is too scared for their careers.
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2023 13:41
|
|
|
Grip it and rip it posted:
I don't think "the GOP" is making any sort of calculation at all. They're just a bunch of fundamentally irrational actors. If the bus from Speed had been half full of maniacs and idiots who panicked randomly and kept doing random idiot poo poo because it felt good in the moment, or gently caress those people on the road, or gently caress those other people in the bus with them, or gently caress it YOLO, or whatever . . . . eventually the bus would crash. That's all this is. That said a default probably would help Trump or any other replacement fascist if Trump falls out of the race due to incarceration or whatever else. Crises always help fascists.
|
|
#
¿
May 25, 2023 15:27
|
|
|
V-Men posted:I meant imposing a type of Senior status on SCOTUS justices after a shortish term. After their term, they'd still be SCOTUS justices, but relegated to voting on cases they want to hear and sharing the load overseeing their respective court of appeals, but wouldn't get to be part of oral arguments. Yeah that's one of the few tactics that's arguably constitutional .
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2023 22:04
|
|
|
Guys is it good or bad if your lawyers all quit the day you're indicted
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2023 18:04
|
|
|
Staluigi posted:then his fuckin Lionel Hutz rear end legal team does a backflip out the back window This is the funniest thing about this to me, because of all the times i've wanted to do that on a client, but haven't My guess is that he spent the past few years in denial with his lawyers going "well, maybe it won't happen, maybe it will, let's prepare" and he ignored them in full denial mode up till BLAMMO and then they tried to explain what he was facing now and he had a full narcissistic rage meltdown at them and raged out and they just went "lol, gently caress no" and bailed on him
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2023 20:54
|
|
|
ArmyGroup303 posted:This is definitely cart-before-horse, but would Trump go to ADX Florence if convicted, given how high-profile a former President is? Hey, let's not look to far ahead where would he be held if the judge denies bond
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2023 21:45
|
|
|
The only actual legal defense he has that I can think of would be a Hail Mary pass at incompetence. Have him evaluated by an expert and get a finding of absolute incompetence to stand trial based on dementia and narcissistic delusions. If you're a lawyer and suggest that to a narcissist you get fired tho
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2023 22:00
|
|
|
ryde posted:Probably have to pin your hopes on jury nullification. Convince them that its "unfair" because everyone does it, and hope that at least one jurist hangs the jury. Yeah, the actual most likely path for this case is a series of hung juries until he dies of old age or gets re-elected and can pardon himself, because you just need one CHUD per jury each time.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2023 22:05
|
|
|
TheDisreputableDog posted:I thought the weakest part of the indictment was the “plucking gesture” part. A nonverbal gesture and it’s subjective interpretation is alot to hang piercing the attorney-client privilege on. I’m assuming they have stranger evidence backstopping this. https://twitter.com/clarkkathleen/status/1667483732188471296?s=20 This was an interesting take. Basically yeah there are a few good reasons to suspect this is just the first indictment, with more likely to come covering other activity outside Florida. It seems more aimed at a trial for Nauta than a trial for Trump. Hieronymous Alloy fucked around with this message at 16:06 on Jun 10, 2023 |
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2023 16:02
|
|
|
It's likely that this isn't going to be the only indictment. There's still conduct being investigated in Georgia and I believe also NY / NJ.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2023 20:14
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:He'll be released unless the government can prove to a judge's satisfaction that he's a flight risk or poses a substantial risk of committing more Espionage Act violations if allowed to go free. Both are an uphill battle for prosecutors at this point. Texiera, Winner, and Manning were all denied bond. I'm not sure when the last time was that someone charged under the Espionage Act was granted bond. Trump will be granted bond but it'll be another case of him getting special treatment. ryde posted:I’m relaying what Ken White and Josh Barro, two practicing lawyers, are saying. Of course they could be wrong but I’ve generally found them to be pretty accurate. They spent about 20 minutes going basically all the arguments people are making in this thread. While they didn’t say “Cannon is almost certainly going to tank this” they laid out a pretty convincing that she has the capability to do so in a way that leaves Jack Smith toothless and that it doesn’t seem beyond her scruples to do so. The best counterargument I've seen to this is that this current indictment is likely not the only forthcoming indictment; it seems designed to pressure Trump's bodyman / valet, Walt Nauta. It's not clear that the case against Trump under this indictment even *can* be prosecuted to trial given the scope of the classified documents involved, but Nauta can be prosecuted without revealing further classified details. Hieronymous Alloy fucked around with this message at 20:55 on Jun 10, 2023 |
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2023 20:51
|
|
|
Theoretically everyone is a flight risk. You could just as easily point out that Trump's wealth means it is much easier for him to flee internationally.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2023 22:46
|
|
|
Also issue of first impression, can a judge ethically hear a case concerning the president who appointed them
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2023 03:17
|
|
|
Jnovs also require basically a "literally no evidence" standard. The last time I saw one granted in my county court was a few years ago after the prosecutors just forgot to introduce any evidence at all to show the alleged crime happened inside county jurisdiction. The prosecutors on that case both left that office within the month, not officially fired but *everyone* knew why. Idea being they only are an issue if the prosecutor is grossly incompetent, either by bringing a case to trial where no evidence existed, or by just forgetting to put things in evidence like an absolute moron Hieronymous Alloy fucked around with this message at 15:45 on Jun 11, 2023 |
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2023 15:40
|
|
|
Red posted:Numerous Trump appointees already have overseen election cases Yeah, but there's a big big big difference between a civil trial and being a criminal defendant. I've seem judges excuse themselves from handling noncontroversial, consensual guilty pleas just because they'd met the alleged victim or because their clerk happened to know the defendant.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2023 15:56
|
|
|
raminasi posted:Is this ever done to remedy improper acquittals? Everything you've described (in this and your other post) seems like it's a way to overturn a conviction, or is only relevant for civil trials. quote:A judge may not enter a JNOV of "guilty" following a jury acquittal in United States criminal cases. Such an action would violate a defendant's Fifth Amendment right not to be placed in double jeopardy and Sixth Amendment right to a trial by jury. If the judge grants a motion to set aside judgment after the jury convicts, however, the action may be reversed on appeal by the prosecution Someone should hunt down a cite for the last time a judge issued a directed verdict for acquittal in a federal trial. It might not have ever happened.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2023 17:05
|
|
|
At least in state court, the prosecution can request a jury trial just like the defense. Technically they refuse to give consent to a non jury trial but the result is the same.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2023 17:25
|
|
|
Fart Amplifier posted:Even if Trump requests a jury trial she can just immediately acquit. She doesn't have to let the whole trial proceed. I don't mean to be all cite please but has this literally ever happened in a federal case because I just looked and couldn't find an instance where it has. I mean I'm just on my phone now so maybe I just ain't lookin right
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2023 17:26
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 18:46 |
|
|
Right, exactly, a Judicial dismissal is appealable by the prosecution. A judicial acquittal after the jury has been sworn is a different thing.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2023 18:05
|
|