Predction: Trump will be pardoned by Biden if he wins

[shuttlt]

You were talking about your opinion of what their concerns were, while ignoring opinions of other concerns that are actually relevant. The only way you could truly be "talking about the concerns of the people who actually get to decide this" would be if you are one of the actual people who actually get to decide this. You are not. I am not. Both of us are merely expressing opinions. Try understanding that before you attempt any more of this Argument from "Authority" nonsense.

Oh, well in that case, it is a mystery what motivates these great decision makers and we must await their judgement. That doesn't make other people's opinions about what should happen relevant to a discussion of what will happen though. Our opinions about what should happen remain unimportant.

You seem to assume that the whole country won't turn against Trump at some point in the future. You may be right; his support has been remarkably stable. I am far from convinced that he will maintain that support in perpetuity, however. Things change...sometimes slowly, but things do change. (And I'm not just talking about while he's in office, but afterward, as well).

Right, but do we think they are going to wait until the man is 80 and irrelevant before going after him and exacting their revenge? How often are elites actually punished? Maybe the noble Biden will usher in a brave new world where elites are held to account and it isn't just peons that go to jail, but I really, really don't think so. Once the political need to try to remove Trump is gone, almost all the impetus to get him will go too.

Now I strongly disagree with this: Consider the following scenario. Trump gets pardoned (maybe by himself, maybe by Pence) for any and all federal crimes. New York state decides to prosecute Trump (you just finally acknowledged a state could decide to do this, after all). NY could obtain a conviction and the federal govt decides to let it stand (do they have a choice? I'm honestly not sure) specifically because conditions "politically allow it" despite the fact that he is immune federally due to the pardon.

What crime are we talking about here? Crime while in office? A conflict of interest maybe? I don't see it. He'd have to do something as outrageous as personally assassinating Biden and then somehow pardoning himself in a way that no rationale could be found to undo.

This is all fantasy "what ifs" though. Getting Trump once he is out of office just won't be important enough to move Heaven and Earth like this. It may be that he gets a slap on the wrist for this or that, but he will be let go.

 

[Roger Ramjets]

It's funny, the view on the right of centre folks I interact with is that they believe the left are misguided/naive and that the left view them as evil. They take the accusations like "anybody who voted for Trump is a racist/knowingly supports racism" as an implication that they are terrible people.

If the shoe fits...

 

[shuttlt]

Hell, why are you asking me??? I can't predict the future. I don't even know whether his approval will ever significantly drop or not. You, on the other hand, seem confident that it never will. Are you absolutely convinced of that? If so, you're the one naively thinking you can predict the future, not me.

Nothing in life is certain. My main point is, and has always been, that getting Trump either in or out of office is a political calculation. The fact that notionally he could be prosecuted for some terrible crime that will carry with it a suitably terrible punishment, and you are sure there is enough evidence to convict him, does not remotely mean that he would be prosecuted, or that he would be convicted.

The difficult side of this is not the legal side of it. The difficult side will be gathering the political will to prosecute him for something like Treason (mentioned earlier by another poster) and finding an unbiased jury. That seems so unlikely to me that it hardly seems worth worrying about.

 

[shuttlt]

And your opinion is another fantasy "what if". Quit pretending your opinion is special.

Thanks.

Sure they aren't special. They are just what I think. Other people are saying what they think. I think they are wrong.

 

[Stacyhs]

Originally Posted by shuttlt View Post
It's funny, the view on the right of centre folks I interact with is that they believe the left are misguided/naive and that the left view them as evil. They take the accusations like "anybody who voted for Trump is a racist/knowingly supports racism" as an implication that they are terrible people.

Perhaps they should consider the old adages "When you lie down with dogs, expect to get up with fleas," "You are known by the friends you keep," "Birds of a feather flock together," and "If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and waddles like a duck, it's probably a duck."

 

[shuttlt]

Perhaps they should consider the old adages "When you lie down with dogs, expect to get up with fleas," "You are known by the friends you keep," "Birds of a feather flock together," and "If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and waddles like a duck, it's probably a duck."

I think they are more likely to think that the Democrats have driven themselves mad and worn out words like "racist" through overuse to the point where huge numbers of people don't take the claims seriously any more.

 

[Stacyhs]

I think they are more likely to think that the Democrats have driven themselves mad and worn out words like "racist" through overuse to the point where huge numbers of people don't take the claims seriously any more.

Any more? They never took them seriously.

He was absolutely correct when he said "I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn't lose any voters, OK?" Donnie knows his base.

ETA: All those women who came out with accusations of Trump assaulting them along with the Access Hollywood tape before the election are proof of that.

 

[ChristianProgressive]

And they want to destroy the economy.

Given that ONE MAN has as more wealth than the entire bottom half and 10% own nearly 90% of wealth, it's destroying itself. Given the fundamental injustice woven into the ecoomy it SHOULD be destroyed and replaced with a a better one.

 

[ChristianProgressive]

You will not a liberal in, they dont represent a majority view point, never have.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/27/maj...uch-as-paid-maternity-leave-free-college.html

 

[ChristianProgressive]

I'm of the opinion that the reconciliation during Reconstruction was a horrible idea. It just kicked the can down the road and now we are dealing with the consequences. This is a fight that has been brewing for a while, even before Trump, and we need to nip it in the bud now.

The same will happen if we try to make peace with the far-right in this country, so we need to make Trump an example by thoroughly destroying him.

Bingo! The North should have done what the Allies did to Japan and Germany after WW II: completely torn down their political culture and rebuilt it along civilized lines.

Reconstruction wasn't harsh enough by half.

 

[acbytesla]

Better to have him stay free than convict somebody that 40% of the population think is innocent because you are super certain he is guilty.

He's not going to jail. That said, I fully expect a thorough investigation and the evidence laid out before the people.

 

[Puppycow]

No that won't play out because Trump will grant sweeping self pardons.

Would that be constitutional though?

What if he resigns after the election but before January 20th and Pence pardons him? That seems like it might work. Could be challenged in court though.

Was Ford's pardon of Nixon ever challenged in court?

 

[shuttlt]

Nothing in life is certain. My main point is, and has always been, that getting Trump either in or out of office is a political calculation. The fact that notionally he could be prosecuted for some terrible crime that will carry with it a suitably terrible punishment, and you are sure there is enough evidence to convict him, does not remotely mean that he would be prosecuted, or that he would be convicted.

The walkback continues. Evidently you have confused yourself:

I am not the one claiming an indictment and conviction of Donald J Trump is a sure thing. Not at all. I'm well aware it's far from certain.

You, on the other hand, were the one claiming it to be an impossibility:

There is no possibility of the precedent being set that any random state can convict a former President of acts done in office. Anybody who thinks that that is going to happen is dreaming.

Allow me to rephrase and insert the word "plausible" or "realistic" before "possibility".

I disagreed. I continue to disagree. And now, evidently, you do too: "Nothing in life is certain". I agree with that. And that's what I have been trying to tell you all along.

Yes. I was speaking hyperbolically when I said "no possibility". If we took every statement like that as a claim of logical impossibility and argued about it the politics forum would grind to a halt.

Are you struggling to keep track of your own position? That's how it appears to me.

You are trying to hold me to the literal truth of a hyperbolic statement. There will [not a logical impossibility, I just mean that I think it is very, very unlikely] not be a significant legal consequence for what he has done in power.

Still struggling to keep track of the topic?

Another poster was. I'm not going to maintain parallel debates with multiple posters simultaneously on the topic. I am arguing against the OP and reacting to other commenters posts as they are made. If Biden decides to pardon Trump it will be because there is no political will to go after him anyway, hence a pardon would not be necessary. Absent of political will I don't see a significant prosecution, that would count as him paying for his actions in office, being successful. I don't think a precedent is going to be set where presidents are held legally accountable for their actions in office. Any attempt to get him prosecuted out of office for the sorts of things democrats think he's done is going to hit the problem that if nothing changes something like 40% of voters will see it as a political hit, and to successfully prosecute him you'd have to keep them out of the jury. Plus what would it do to the country to have 40% of the voters thinking the other side had taken out their guy? Why light a fire like that under his supporters.

We're not talking about him being prosecuted for Treason. We're talking about him being prosecuted for anything. You keep walking back your position...He won't ever be prosecuted for anything.........Well, he won't be prosecuted for something like Treason.........Well, his support level would have to be dropped before they attempted to prosecute him.

A previous poster absolutely was talking about Treason, so I mentioned that as an example. This thread isn't about pardoning him for parking fines and library books he failed to return. He has lost court cases and received fines in the past. I doubt too many people will be shocked if that occurs in the future. What I don't see happening to him is a conviction for anything that would be seen as him paying for what he did in office for all the reasons I've discussed.

 

[This is The End]

You need to convince enough of the population that he is bad enough that he needs to go/be convicted of something big.

You just don't get it. There is literally nothing he can do because enough of the population thinks the "other side", ironically, is satanic. They will write anything off as "there must be a plan".

 

[Lurch]

The one good thing Drumpf has done is to reveal the glaring problems in a political system reliant upon the kinds of norms that guide people with some shred of a conscience and the capacity for shame.

The cat's now outta the bag. Any bad actor able to wrangle the necessary support could win for himself this most lucrative and promising position from which to engage in all manner of grift and self-aggrandizement. Or help family, friends and confederates to crime and then pardon. Or take down the system itself.

A crucial task awaiting the next crew is to harden the system against this kind of potential for scumbaggery. Right now the state of affairs has effectively put POTUS above the other two branches, and is getting worryingly close to creating a position immune to consequences. Smacks a little too much of a Royalty that's above the law, or at least accorded an unconstitutional deference.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

Because of the Conservative Bubble, all that a Republican needs to get elected is the backing of FOX and the Sinclair Group.
They are the ones running the campaign

 

[Lurch]

Allow me to rephrase and insert the word "plausible" or "realistic" before "possibility".


Yes. I was speaking hyperbolically when I said "no possibility". If we took every statement like that as a claim of logical impossibility and argued about it the politics forum would grind to a halt.


You are trying to hold me to the literal truth of a hyperbolic statement. There will [not a logical impossibility, I just mean that I think it is very, very unlikely] not be a significant legal consequence for what he has done in power.


Another poster was. I'm not going to maintain parallel debates with multiple posters simultaneously on the topic. I am arguing against the OP and reacting to other commenters posts as they are made. If Biden decides to pardon Trump it will be because there is no political will to go after him anyway, hence a pardon would not be necessary. Absent of political will I don't see a significant prosecution, that would count as him paying for his actions in office, being successful. I don't think a precedent is going to be set where presidents are held legally accountable for their actions in office. Any attempt to get him prosecuted out of office for the sorts of things democrats think he's done is going to hit the problem that if nothing changes something like 40% of voters will see it as a political hit, and to successfully prosecute him you'd have to keep them out of the jury. Plus what would it do to the country to have 40% of the voters thinking the other side had taken out their guy? Why light a fire like that under his supporters.


A previous poster absolutely was talking about Treason, so I mentioned that as an example. This thread isn't about pardoning him for parking fines and library books he failed to return. He has lost court cases and received fines in the past. I doubt too many people will be shocked if that occurs in the future. What I don't see happening to him is a conviction for anything that would be seen as him paying for what he did in office for all the reasons I've discussed.

Do you have a bar that, once crossed via some crime while in office, would decidedly warrant prosecution?

I assume murder would meet this test? How about rape? How about pilfering from the Treasury? How about leading the scheme to delay the Post for one's own political benefit (which includes the danger of slowing medications, not just ballots)?

All these are crimes we peons would be charged with, in a heartbeat. Just what is the country willing to give a POTUS a pass on? Should it be anything every other citizen would not be? If so, why should we accord such a privilege to just one person, when one of the most foundational tenets of the nation is that no one is above the law? To actually apply a more lenient standard to one man is to put the lie to the claim, and admit to a very real hypocrisy, a non-uniform application of law. The kind of unfairness that is a degradation, a cause for societal apathy and decay.

 

[uke2se]

If Trump tries to pardon himself, that's going to be a pretty big legal battle as well. Not everyone agrees that he can legally do that.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

If Trump tries to pardon himself, that's going to be a pretty big legal battle as well. Not everyone agrees that he can legally do that.

I shudder to think about what Trump will demand of Trump in compensation for pardoning him.

 

[ChristianProgressive]

Because of the Conservative Bubble, GOP election rigging all that a Republican needs to get elected is the backing of FOX and the Sinclair Group.
They are the ones running the campaign

FIFY