Should Donald Trump fail a second time to be re-elected he faces the very real possibility of jail time and massive financial penalties due to the sheer volume of criminal cases and civil lawsuits that are on hold until after the election.

That is the opinion of Syracuse University law professor Greg Germain who explained in an interview with Newsweek that the former president’s only path to get out from under the federal cases he now faces is to beat Vice President Kamala Harris in less than two weeks and then push the Department of Justice to drop the cases filed against him.

As Germain stated, the multiple federal cases Trump is facing are solid and his only path to victory may be having them shut down.

Newsweek source: https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-legal-cases-georgia-washington-florida-new-york-stormy-daniels-chutkan-cannon-1974406

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
71 points

Why exactly are they on hold until the election? Shouldn’t it be like really important to determine if he’s guilty before they crown him?

permalink
report
reply
33 points

Corruption, pure and simple corruption.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

So a corruption that will exist after the election as well

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

We have but to wait and see. There are new and perverse forms of corruption recently enabled. We’ve always had and will always have corruption. If he doesn’t get it, I give it 50:50 they’ll still let him off.

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

The humans who implement the judicial system are likely fearful of the purge that would come following a Trump victory.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

I felt the same for a long time, but as much as I hate to admit it, it does kind of make sense in an abhorrent kind of way.

The hierarchy in a democracy is supposed to go…

Voting Public ➡️ Representatives ➡️ Laws ➡️ Courts ➡️ Rulings

That being the case, a Court shouldn’t really hear cases that might undermine the will of the Voting Public.

If courts are empowered by the Voting Public, then a Court should not be in a position to make a Ruling the Voting Public does not want, despite that Ruling being correct in the context of the Law.

Another way of saying the same thing, is that if the Voting Public want’s Trump to have a fair trial they would obviously not elect him as President.

permalink
report
parent
reply
21 points

I understand your viewpoint, but disagree.

By that argument any criminal ever could argue against prosecution because they intend to run for a public office. Ridiculous exaggeration of course, but if Trump gets this chance, everyone else should too.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-9 points

Not really, as you said it’s just not within the realm of possibility for anyone else.

Trump stands a good chance of being elected in a few weeks. An unfavourable court ruling would undermine that. Do you want to live in a country where courts are more powerful than the will of the people?

Also, imagine what would happen if he did get locked up now. It would be pandemonium, and not without reason.

The only way to get rid of Trump is to vote against him, then watch him fade into irrelevance.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

Well, if the voting public has ultimate say than why are there rules on who can become president in the first place?

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

The public electing representatives who make these rules is one thing. Courts undermining elections arbitrarily is entirely another.

The public needs to decide whether they want Trump to be held accountable for his crimes.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

While you make a point to consider, an educated and informed electorate is bedrock to a democracy.

Maybe the results of the Discovery process should be public record before a vote.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Yeah but also nah.

Airing dirty laundry in discovery is tantamount to an unfavourable ruling - its still the courts undermining a democratic process.

Imagine if the shoe were on the other foot - a republican judge digging away for dirt on Kamala during “discovery”.

You would feel that unfair, and that’s exactly how republicans world feel about Trump going through some kind of discovery process now.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Another way of saying the same thing, is that if the Voting Public want’s

If winning the vote entailed an actual public majority, you might have some argument there. But that’s not what we have.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

I acknowledge that the electoral college misrepresents the popular vote, but that is the mechanism by which the will of your voting public is polled.

That’s not really relevant to my point, which is simply that in a healthy democracy courts need to avoid influencing elections.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

I want to see that orange turd locked up as much as any rational levelheaded person, but my fear is that it would set a dangerous precedent to convict and jail during an election.

Because all the batshit bonkers right-wingers in politics would use it as a baseline to file court cases against any of their political opponents during election season, find some Uber corrupt right-winger judge and miraculously the only ones left on ballots are the repubs

permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to “Mom! He’s bugging me!” and “I’m not touching you!” Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 15K

    Monthly active users

  • 16K

    Posts

  • 470K

    Comments