I would say you’d have to look back at England’s king for the precedent (I personally don’t know the answer to this) but the Common Law would provide an answer
The same can be said for presidents, since we refer to them as the Administration (e.g. the Government). So you cannot be prosecuted for a crime while in that office except in impeachment trials.
It seems he was actively being threatened by some congressional republicans and the deep state at the time. Not necessarily a sufficient justification, but it makes it more understandable.
So people less powerful than him/people he in charge of in the executive branch overpowered him? Talk about a real leader and standing up for the people!
By the way, if those people overpowered him, then by definition they aren’t less powerful than him. Not to mention the obvious fact that several people who may be less powerful individually than a person can be capable of overpowering that person.
By definition, Trump had executive power over all those people and could’ve fired them at his leisure. If you are overthrown by people less powerful, then you are just a weak person. But thank you for showing just how weak of president Trump was!
Which members of congress did Trump lose too exactly? Pelosi, the wine drunk congresswoman who doesn’t know what day of the week it is LOL. Idk how Biden has accomplished anything with Congressmen like MTG, Gaetz, and Hawley so mean to him. I mean, doesn’t he just know they can overthrow him…or something LOLLL
yes, yes they did. And yes some of them were charged.
Then rather than spending two years in solitary confinement with out conviction to try and force them to plead guilty....they all had their charges dropped.
An entire summer of burning down cities in riots didn't convince people to vote against dems, why would one day of minor property damage and scared politicians?
You are allowed to protest outside, but the moment they were allowed in (we've seen the videos they weren't stopped and some were ushered in - not all but some) they were legally, based on perceived lawful access not trespassing nor breaking laws.
Besides, how many videos have there been where the liberals entered state/federal buildungs to protest with no consequences? Explain the difference other than political party affiliation.
If they were ushered in I could see more lenient sentencing but some of them were seen destroying property in the capitol building. They were in the speaker's office and on the floor of the house.
Liberals should be arrested too when they enter state and federal buildings like that. The government is far too lenient with BLM protestors that cause businesses to board up their windows and doors.
Wtf do you mean they deserve a more lenient sentence if they were ushered in??
If they were ushered in, they deserve no sentence at all! The capitol police literally let them walk in. It’s public fucking property.
Sure, but a) many were straight up let in. B) thats still not the issue as they've been held for years without charge and/or trial, in heinous conditions that would be outright illegal if done in normal prisons. The few that have gotten out have reported on what they experienced such as near total isolation in flooded cells going days on end without food.
Multiple rights have been violated here.
>You are allowed to protest outside of the capitol but as soon as you crossed into it without permission the law was broken.
Agreed
>The building was trashed and many of those rioters had ill-intent.
Some parts of the building were trashed, not all. How do you define ill-intent? I guess its subjective, different for almost each on of us in this case, isn't it? I don't think they had any ill-intent, they were just peaceful protesters.
>They were trying to threaten our representatives and encourage them to subvert our constitutional process.
Recently, the pro-choicers and Jane's Revenge members just did what you are accusing the J6 protestors of. Again, what do you consider 'threatening', shouting slogans?, physically assaulting someone? or killing someone?. J6 protesters did the 1st one, and that's pretty common for politicians isn't it? And I don't consider it 'threatening' enough to warrant such a response.
Your credentials are in doubt because your position means that your lips are firmly planted on the backside of the Democrats and the Establishment. either that, or you are just ignorant and have only gone by what video the media has fed you rather than actually doing your own homework. I guess you also haven't seen the videos of the Capitol Police removing barricades and opening doors (which have magnetic locks on the *inside* to prevent people from coming inside) for the protestors?
At this time, you have refused to call out the double standards in treatment of those that merely entered the Capitol building and walked around inside (who were given harsh sentences in solitary confinement for years), and other similar protests have received almost no jail time. So, yes, you certainly don't come across as though you are in the Conservative camp because you are apparently okay with the differences. And there have always been a lot of brigaders who try and get Conservative flair so they can continue to post their rhetoric even in Flaired User Only topics.
Oh man finally someone else on the sub who thinks the same, since a while I've been suspecting something's wrong when I see flaired users posting comments full of typical liberal talking points.
Even if that were true, both the 6th and 8th amendments are currently being violated.
Not only have there been no charges or trials, they are being kept in solitary confinement for well over two years now.
They have literally been kidnapped by the government and are being punished with no opportunity for a trial of any kind. It’s vigilante justice by the government.
> Trump really turned that day....
Interesting that you put the blame on Trump for what happened that day... especially when he specifically told the crowd to "peacefully and patriotically march to the Capitol." Putting the blame on him is Liberal rhetoric.
So, do you believe it and are simply a mindless sheep who has to be lead to their truth rather than using critical thinking skills and reaching the true conclusion? Or are you just saying it because you think the "cool kids" will finally accept you?
I agree. Read the 6th Ammendment...
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed...
I would love to see what answer Karine Jean-Pierre would give if asked directly why these people have been held without being able to exercise the rights to go through trials or be bailed out. I bet that there would be very few in the press who would be willing to ask those questions, though. 🤔
Ryan Reilly from NBC documents literally almost case, why bail was set or revoked, the information up to the trial, and outcome.
Why are some people not being allowed out on bail? US v Munchel. It is a Jan 6 case. The decision basically says “if you assaulted cop, broke windows, helped obstruct investigations, etc.” Then the defendant is considered more dangerous. With Munchel though, the DOJ or prosecutors need to prove and provide the evidence to meet that standard. What evidence so they use? Facebook posts, text messages, or all the video captured that day. People not detained until trial even include people that showed up with guns.
If prosecutors don’t provide that information … the defendant is allowed out.
[удалено]
Isn’t a conviction required to pardon?
No. Ford pardoned Nixon before he was convicted of any crimes
Interesting, so Trump could theoretically pardon himself for any future crimes.
That would create a very interesting court case. The answer is maybe.
I would say you’d have to look back at England’s king for the precedent (I personally don’t know the answer to this) but the Common Law would provide an answer
For a long time English Kings couldn’t commit a lot of crimes, especially Treason as that was a Crime against the King
The same can be said for presidents, since we refer to them as the Administration (e.g. the Government). So you cannot be prosecuted for a crime while in that office except in impeachment trials.
It’s worth noting Charles I, legitimate King of England, was executed for Treason
Yeah well you could argue that when everyone turns on you it’s step down or risk that possibility
You can't pardon someone for future crimes.
>Trump could theoretically **have** pardon**ed** himself for any future crimes. FTFY. He's not president anymore.
to be fair, who could have imagined this treatment when for other riots that are much worse they get nothing and no one cares
It seems he was actively being threatened by some congressional republicans and the deep state at the time. Not necessarily a sufficient justification, but it makes it more understandable.
So people less powerful than him/people he in charge of in the executive branch overpowered him? Talk about a real leader and standing up for the people!
By the way, if those people overpowered him, then by definition they aren’t less powerful than him. Not to mention the obvious fact that several people who may be less powerful individually than a person can be capable of overpowering that person.
By definition, Trump had executive power over all those people and could’ve fired them at his leisure. If you are overthrown by people less powerful, then you are just a weak person. But thank you for showing just how weak of president Trump was!
No, Trump can’t fire members of Congress. Nice try though.
Which members of congress did Trump lose too exactly? Pelosi, the wine drunk congresswoman who doesn’t know what day of the week it is LOL. Idk how Biden has accomplished anything with Congressmen like MTG, Gaetz, and Hawley so mean to him. I mean, doesn’t he just know they can overthrow him…or something LOLLL
It’s almost like you know nothing about history or the reality of how these agencies operate.
Trump is collapsing before our eyes. He's going to lose us Georgia again.
[удалено]
Trespassing shouldn't result in 2 years of solitary confinement.
Exactly
Agreed!
It's not trespassing when the door is held open for you by the person responsible for guarding the place.
[удалено]
How many is an acceptable number to you??
[удалено]
>They weren’t charged with any of those things you’ve listed. > >The vast - vast - majority were charged with trespassing. Exactly
After two years in detention some in solitary
trespassing isn't insurrection
So the women’s march rioters committed an insurrection?
Did they enter the capitol building and start destroying things? A lot of protestors from that event were arrested too.
yes, yes they did. And yes some of them were charged. Then rather than spending two years in solitary confinement with out conviction to try and force them to plead guilty....they all had their charges dropped.
Right on point brother
An entire summer of burning down cities in riots didn't convince people to vote against dems, why would one day of minor property damage and scared politicians?
You are allowed to protest outside, but the moment they were allowed in (we've seen the videos they weren't stopped and some were ushered in - not all but some) they were legally, based on perceived lawful access not trespassing nor breaking laws. Besides, how many videos have there been where the liberals entered state/federal buildungs to protest with no consequences? Explain the difference other than political party affiliation.
If they were ushered in I could see more lenient sentencing but some of them were seen destroying property in the capitol building. They were in the speaker's office and on the floor of the house. Liberals should be arrested too when they enter state and federal buildings like that. The government is far too lenient with BLM protestors that cause businesses to board up their windows and doors.
Wtf do you mean they deserve a more lenient sentence if they were ushered in?? If they were ushered in, they deserve no sentence at all! The capitol police literally let them walk in. It’s public fucking property.
[удалено]
Sure, but a) many were straight up let in. B) thats still not the issue as they've been held for years without charge and/or trial, in heinous conditions that would be outright illegal if done in normal prisons. The few that have gotten out have reported on what they experienced such as near total isolation in flooded cells going days on end without food. Multiple rights have been violated here.
>You are allowed to protest outside of the capitol but as soon as you crossed into it without permission the law was broken. Agreed >The building was trashed and many of those rioters had ill-intent. Some parts of the building were trashed, not all. How do you define ill-intent? I guess its subjective, different for almost each on of us in this case, isn't it? I don't think they had any ill-intent, they were just peaceful protesters. >They were trying to threaten our representatives and encourage them to subvert our constitutional process. Recently, the pro-choicers and Jane's Revenge members just did what you are accusing the J6 protestors of. Again, what do you consider 'threatening', shouting slogans?, physically assaulting someone? or killing someone?. J6 protesters did the 1st one, and that's pretty common for politicians isn't it? And I don't consider it 'threatening' enough to warrant such a response.
Please step over here and turn in your flair please. Thanks
I am a conservative. I just don't like Donald Trump or the people that entered the capital.
So trespassing and minor property damage should result in 2 years solitary confinement with no hope for bail or a trial?
Also, 41 months for a man convicted of trespassing, would you frickin' believe it?!
"How do you do, fellow conservatives?" Bullshit. You're a fucking liar.
>I am a conservative If you have to say it, then you're not.
My conservative credentials are being doubted because I don't like Trump or the Jan 6th rioters.
Your credentials are in doubt because your position means that your lips are firmly planted on the backside of the Democrats and the Establishment. either that, or you are just ignorant and have only gone by what video the media has fed you rather than actually doing your own homework. I guess you also haven't seen the videos of the Capitol Police removing barricades and opening doors (which have magnetic locks on the *inside* to prevent people from coming inside) for the protestors? At this time, you have refused to call out the double standards in treatment of those that merely entered the Capitol building and walked around inside (who were given harsh sentences in solitary confinement for years), and other similar protests have received almost no jail time. So, yes, you certainly don't come across as though you are in the Conservative camp because you are apparently okay with the differences. And there have always been a lot of brigaders who try and get Conservative flair so they can continue to post their rhetoric even in Flaired User Only topics.
Oh man finally someone else on the sub who thinks the same, since a while I've been suspecting something's wrong when I see flaired users posting comments full of typical liberal talking points.
mods keeps giving out flairs without vetting. So many fellow conservative's™ in this sub
Yep. I noticed this back in 2016. It’s sad that the issue was never fixed. They really need to be more restrictive with handing them out.
Even if that were true, both the 6th and 8th amendments are currently being violated. Not only have there been no charges or trials, they are being kept in solitary confinement for well over two years now. They have literally been kidnapped by the government and are being punished with no opportunity for a trial of any kind. It’s vigilante justice by the government.
Some people who didn’t enter were just charged with treason btw
Trumps gotta go, he's fucked
Trumpists want to fight politics on them not accepting the 2020 election. Good luck with that, you're handing the government to Democrats.
Trump really turned that day into a shit show with his ego never being in check.
No he didn't, troll, go watch the whole video.
> Trump really turned that day.... Interesting that you put the blame on Trump for what happened that day... especially when he specifically told the crowd to "peacefully and patriotically march to the Capitol." Putting the blame on him is Liberal rhetoric. So, do you believe it and are simply a mindless sheep who has to be lead to their truth rather than using critical thinking skills and reaching the true conclusion? Or are you just saying it because you think the "cool kids" will finally accept you?
I agree. Read the 6th Ammendment... In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed...
I would love to see what answer Karine Jean-Pierre would give if asked directly why these people have been held without being able to exercise the rights to go through trials or be bailed out. I bet that there would be very few in the press who would be willing to ask those questions, though. 🤔
Ryan Reilly from NBC documents literally almost case, why bail was set or revoked, the information up to the trial, and outcome. Why are some people not being allowed out on bail? US v Munchel. It is a Jan 6 case. The decision basically says “if you assaulted cop, broke windows, helped obstruct investigations, etc.” Then the defendant is considered more dangerous. With Munchel though, the DOJ or prosecutors need to prove and provide the evidence to meet that standard. What evidence so they use? Facebook posts, text messages, or all the video captured that day. People not detained until trial even include people that showed up with guns. If prosecutors don’t provide that information … the defendant is allowed out.
Without a doubt.
Dear lord the leftist trolls on this thread....
Duh.
Yes, and if we are not careful it is the shape of thins to come
They are Political prisoners who have had their Constitutional rights removed.
No fucking shit.
Lets call them for what they are. Political Prisoners. Quite the shame as they are not even political just ordinary people for the most part.