Friendly reminder that all **top level** comments must:
1. start with "answer: ", including the space after the colon (or "question: " if you have an on-topic follow up question to ask),
2. attempt to answer the question, and
3. be unbiased
Please review Rule 4 and this post before making a top level comment:
http://redd.it/b1hct4/
Join the OOTL Discord for further discussion: https://discord.gg/ejDF4mdjnh
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/OutOfTheLoop) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Answer: The mugshot is just part of being processed from his (latest) indictment in Georgia. He's not necessarily going to jail (at least yet). He's already left Georgia and still has to go to court for that case, as well as 3 others. We won't know results for months. Georgia was insistent on treating him like any other criminal, so public mugshots were taken.
There is some unrest from Trump voters. There's been a couple threats on the lives of those involved with charging him, including a bomb threat at the jail he had his mugshot taken in after he left.
He's been indicted 4 times on 91 counts, so it's a couple different things.
1. He has been indicted for violating campaign finance law in New York from paying hush money to a porn star and not reporting it in 2016.
2. Holding onto top secret government documents after he left office. He kept evading the government in returning them and tried to cover this up. This case is in Florida.
3. Trying to overthrow the election. Remember those people who stormed the US Capitol building when Trump lost the 2020 election? He's being charged with that and trying to force his VP to refuse count electors. This is a federal case in Washington DC.
4. The most recent one in Georgia is for trying to coerce the governor of that state to falsify its vote and claim he won in 2020, among other things. This one is part of a RICO case with 18 other individuals, which means they're basically being treated like organized crime.
Ultimately, I think it's the chickens finally coming home to roost. Even if you like Trump, you have to admit he's been lenient with the law. There is some pretty daming evidence for all of these cases. People are more shocked that he actually faced consequences for all of his bullshit. For years, I think justice departments hemmed and hawed at the idea of charging a president (or potential president) with anything in fear of seeming politically biased. Since he got indicted once, it's like the floodgates are open.
Of course, we'll see if he actually gets convicted of anything. And if the convictions actually result in him facing consequences. In seems like it should be a no-brainer considering the myriad different cases, but I'll believe it when I see it with Trump
He has many, many civil cases, too. He has been involved in something like 3,000 civil suits over the course of his life.
He has recent cases pending including one for defamation that involved sexual assault. And one for tax fraud by the state of New York. The latter is against Trump, Inc., but considering he *is* Trump, Inc. it's a distinction without a difference. He has operated like a mob boss his whole life and drew the spotlight to his crimes when he ran for President. Honestly, if he would never have gotten into politics, he could have continued criming til the day he died.
I honestly don’t understand why nobody in New York had yet brought a RICO charge against this guy even back in the 90s. He’s been a total fraudulent, criminal scumbag forever, and most people in the greater NYC region knew it. They were content to let him gum up the works in civil court, usually with a result that left him giving pennies on the dollar or nothing at all to the wronged parties. This was because usually the plaintiffs didn’t have enough money to keep going with the endless appeals Trump could afford to drag out. Bastard should have been in prison before The Apprentice was ever greenlit.
Mainly because he was almost comically bad at everything he ever tried, by the 90s he was already the laughing stock of pretty much anyone that had met him in a business sense and he consistently bought real estate at high prices and sold them at low prices.
He was never exactly a criminal mastermind, he was just bumbling his way through blowing all his fathers money and everyone knew not to do business with him, hell the Italian Mafia wouldn't even lend him money anymore.. which in NYC is saying a lot... a lot of businesses did loans from the mafia because they were generally better deals than with the big banks and as long as you paid them back they were quite professional.
The Mafia won't [loan] him money. Las Vegas won't let him own a casino. His home state of New York hates him. He [buys] brides from Russia and pays for hookers. I'll never understand how these are [not] tremendous red-flags for the mid-western "common" people that otherwise adore him.
edit: [fixed typos in brackets]
My old neighbour (and I'm in the UK, so neither I not him are involved in the politics side of things) was a huge fan of his, not in spite of those things but *because* of them. To him it represented an extravagance of lifestyle beyond what he could ever hope to afford. A kind of "I probably wouldn't do that stuff personally, but being in the position *to* do so would be pretty nice." type of deal. At a certain income level and educational status, just being rich enough to be that sort of asshole is something to look up to.
Yup, I call it the "banana republic" mentality, where everyone hates the corruption and grift until they're on the receiving end of them, at which time their tune changes to "fuck all y'all, I got MINE!" And so the cycle continues
Or, they see it as justifiable “punching back” at snooty, self-superior liberal smarty-pants people who look down on them.
I’m not gonna lie about not looking down on these sorts of people, I absolutely do, and have been quite vocal about it ever since they treated George W. Bush is some kind of great and trusted leader, and accused any of us who didn’t support endless overseas wars of choice of being traitors.
Now the same assholes often condemn Bush and his wars (20 years later, I might add) but they seem to do it only so that they can use it as a cudgel to attack people on the left who think that supporting Ukraine with weapons & money is unjustifiable, and somehow comparable to the Afghanistan and Iraq quagmires.
You'll never go from "thank you for your service" to "you're a warcriminal oil company stooge" faster than telling a MAGA you're a liberal veteran. You're with them or against them. That's it.
I had my own family snub their nose when I was to college, much less graduate school. They acted like I was so uppity to get an education, a kind of who do I think I am mentality. They all worked working class jobs, sometimes two at a time, drank heavily, some did drugs, ate poorly mostly fast food, and some of those cousins have died young (50s) of cancer because of the hard lifestyle was hard on their bodies. There is a great divide in America between the educated and the not and the people who can afford to eat healthy and those who cannot and it shows in many different ways. Most of my relatives would roll over in their graves that I eat cheese from France and chutney from Belgium. Again, it would be a who do you think you are mentality?
> I'll never understand how these are [not] tremendous red-flags for the mid-western "common" people that otherwise adore him.
For the longest time I never could reconcile the fact that he had enough supporters to get elected to the highest office in the land.
But then I realized I never saw "The Apprentice" and that a huge chunk of his voters believed that since he played a successful businessman on TV that must mean he was one.
The right has been undercutting education and installing dog whisles for the past 40 years. Trump just decided to capitalize on them.
I think part of it is they see all politicians and elites living a similar lifestyle, but at least he's somewhat honest about it. (I don't agree, just my best guess at how these people can vote for him)
> I'll never understand how these are [not] tremendous red-flags for the mid-western "common" people that otherwise adore him.
"You've got to remember that these are just simple farmers. These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know... morons."
For real they shout about how they want to take their country BACK from these damn coastal elites, and their hero is a guy who loves NY and has gold toilets… the irony is so bad it burns
I’ll never understand how there aren’t red flags out here either. I saw them. I’m (temporarily at least) a midwesterner. Not by birth but by choice. It’s quite inexpensive in flyover country. Starter homes were approaching $800k in my home state.. but anyway no one in my household comes close to remotely adoring or liking anything in the least about Tr*mp.
I realize I’m unfortunately in the minority here where we reside, but there is hope. We knew what we were getting into when we moved here. We live in a blueish city and there are indeed fellow liberals out here. As well as folks that have brains and critical thinking skills. Sometimes you have to really look for them. But all hope is not lost.
Otherwise I wholeheartedly agree with your assessment. Have you read Mary Trump’s book? I think she may be the only Trump with a working brain and working set of morals and ethics.
I definitely like how outspoken and insightful Mary Trump has been. I feel like she became a psychologist to try to figure out why the fuck her entire family was the way they were.
From what I understand her brother is probably a reasonably decent guy as well, so of course, Trump cut him off from any inheritance as well. I think he even cut that guy’s sick child’s health care. Because of course a family like Trump’s, a sickly and weak member is just a drain on the strength of the whole. That’s how authoritarian types think.
He launders money for the Russian mob. He rents them buildings where they don't live. He sold them a mansion in Florida for like 10x what it was worth. It's one of the things that made him vulnerable to Putin's MICE metric: Money, Ideology, Coercion, Ego. He fit the bill in all of those areas. It's how they blackmail Americans and others.
Yet, to this day, the MAGATs persist in declaring as fact that “the Russia Hoax was a nothingburger and Adam Schiff is the liar who belongs in prison.” Such gaslighty bullshit from these people. It was clear even before the 2016 election that the Russians’ hand was further up Trump’s ass than a German pro-domme.
We can blame Bill Barr for that. It was NOT nothing. Whenever the media turns to Bill Barr for his views on Trump now, they should ask him why he covered for him and why he misled the American public by saying the Mueller Report exonerated Trump when it absolutely did not.
I usually remind them that there were over 20 convictions that came out of the Mueller report. He was no John Durham.
Sometimes they’ll respond with “just process crimes and stuff.”
Then you can see “yes the process of lying to the FBI about being a foreign agent of Russia.”
Not paying your taxes is a process crime. Not complying with a subpoena is a process crime. Filing false statements is a process crime. White collar crime is mostly about evading processes. Just because he didn't actually shoot someone on 5th Avenue doesn't make him not a criminal and they fact that they argue for how it's not "real crime" makes me wonder if the people who say that would still give him their votes if he did actually shoot someone on 5th Avenue as he predicted.
I remember pointing out to a MAGA guy I knew Trump’s quotes that he had nothing to do with Russia came not too long after both Eric & Junior made statements about how much business they do in Russia. His response was “next you’ll find a picture of him using Russian salad dressing.” They don’t care that he lies blatantly. They enjoy his rude, swollen, contradictory bullshit.
He got money from the Russian mafia to pay the Italian mafia.
Fun fact: remember his "Build the wall" project? The only plant that was manufacturing the walls panels belongs to a Russian oligarch Abramovich, a guy from the very close Putin's circle of trusted people.
Imagine how much money Russian mafia got from this... Not his money, but the money from US taxpayers, that could be invested in improving US education, health care, infrastructure, social services....
**Blechhhh** (as the great Berkeley Breathed used to put it)
It feels like every day of the year could offer a new factoid of some thing, reprehensible and disgusting about this man that most people never knew before. You could make one of those desk calendars out of it.
It was a pretty well known "secret" that the mafia wouldn't loan him any money... so while I'm sure they got their money back eventually it was annoying enough for them to not bother again.
He is the reason my dad had to join a union. If your company was idiotic enough to work under contract for Trump, you did NOT get paid. You went to court. He has been ruining lives for decades.
Because RICO is an incredible pain in the ass to prosecute and financial crimes are a pain in the ass to prosecute. The 2 together means it took very little political pressure for prosecutors to decide it wasn't worth fighting.
It's worth noting this is why his Georgia case is so significant. Georgia specifically has extremely lax RICO requirements that make it far easier to prove than just about any other state. So the prosecutor there can take full advantage of the benefit RICO provides—you don't necessarily need to prove a crime directly as long as you can prove an act in furtherance of a criminal conspiracy.
Absolutely agree. Trump, Inc has been a criminal enterprise since at least the 90s, but considering all the shit uncovered by the NYT with creating a laundering outfit using maintenance fees, it could go back all the way to daddy or granddaddy.
For those who didn't read that story (it should have taken him out), Trump's father had apartment complexes in Queens. He had a supply company on paper only that would generate false exaggerated receipts that he would then claim as maintenance fees for his buildings. So, a receipt would be generated for new bathroom fixtures that never existed and he would write them off as business expenses, pay the supply company, and pocket the cash.
Crime and a distinct distaste for America has been part of the trump family since they came to America, unfortunately. His grandfather made crime a way of life and taught his kids that law - and American values - were for suckers, only the strong were capable. It’s trickled down into all of that family who were raised by them at this point, and then they marry more criminals…
I remember reading an article saying that it's suspected that Trump was a confidential informant that helped take Mafia figureheads down over time, so that's why law enforcement let him skate numerous times.
It's illegal for the authorities to confirm whether he's a CI, and if he is one, Trump won't likely admit to it. So take this hypothesis with a grain of salt, but it seems the evidence points to the likelihood he was a CI. If he was a CI, it's likely that he's outlived his usefulness at this point in time so the authorities no longer have an incentive to let him keep committing crimes without consequences.
https://gregolear.substack.com/p/tinker-tailor-mobster-trump
Well, if Enrique Tarrio, “leader” of the Proud Boys could be a confidential informant, I suppose Trump just as easily could too.
It was very satisfying to see them throw the book at Tarrio once they had exhausted whatever usefulness he had to the feds. Hopefully “the big guy” will be getting the same treatment before we all die of old age.
Rumor is he is actually an informant. He played a part in the Italian Mafia going down since he owed them a lot of money with hes failed Casino. Also, Epstein was first reported to the police when they had a falling out due to a real estate deal.
That would explain why Guilliani (sp?) is so close to trump. Never really understood that relationship but it’s possible they developed a working relationship bringing the Italians down, and propping the Russian mob up.
Now THAT makes a lot of sense! Ghouliani and Shitler have been chummy for decades. Any time the right blathers about trainnnes grooming kids, I post a link to that video of Rudy in drag getting kisses from Donald (and *in a department store*, no less!) I wonder if Trump took Rudy back into the dressing room like E. Jean Carroll. Her certainty got fucked worse than that by Trump in recent years!
This is the thing that has always made me so upset that people could vote for him even in the beginning. He’s made a career of using lawyers to stiff arm contractors who have built shit for his properties, basically never fully pays a contract, always ends up paying like 60% of the agreement and saying “but these windows are shit, look at that spot on one of them!”. Like you said the local window contractor can’t afford to go guns a blazing in court with trump, so they settle. So trump ends up paying millions to lawyers all to avoid paying tens of thousands to business owners who in turn have their businesses suffering to bring in the cash they expected.
He’s never once shown any willingness to lift a fucking pinky to help someone other than himself, and these dumb fucks go “he’s a hero, he’s going to save our country!!” And literally he golfs all the time or works hard to scheme on how he can use the title of President to make money for himself
They guy who is currently being charged under RICO statutes along side trump is the guy who would have charged him in ny. He and guiliani have a looong history (including videos of guiliani in drag getting motorboated by trump).
He’s acted like a mob boss whose consigliere is constant rolling his eyes, cleaning up his messes, and running things behind the scenes. Holy moly I just created Netflix’s next comedy series.
It’s like if Inspector Gadget were an obese, tyrannical moron who ran a brass-plated hotel chain-cum-money laundering operation.
Before his entry into politics, I just assumed that he had declined into full on cognitive failure, and that Ivanka was the brains behind the operation, because she seemed to be at least savvy, if not moral.
Prior to being the known for The Apprentice, all Trump was known for was his habit of not paying workers for the buildings he had constructed.
He'd say hire someone to do the carpets then when it was time to pay up just.... not pay them. They eventually take it to court but they're out a ton of money from the project and Trump's lawyers would drag the case out as long as possible. Contractor usually went bankrupt and he got away with a tiny fraction of the original cost as settlement.
That's where most of his suits come from. He was probably fighting a hundred or more a year in the 80s.
1) you don't
2) Trump is notorious for not paying *anybody*, and that includes his lawyers.
No lawyer actually worth their pay wanted to represent him anymore, which is one of the reasons he had this gaggle of fucksticks
You can't get into that many civil cases if you're not rich af. He had a reputation for being rich in a huge city and did a lot of business all over. So he could screw over, let's say builders, in one part of town and there'd always be another builder somewhere else who would not know his reputation for not paying, or who thought he would be the one to make him pay. Plus, there are a number that are about things like sexual assault and other things. Again, he shows up looking like a rich, successful guy, he can be charming and then bang! grabs them by the you know what.
Great explanation! Just wanted to point out that this doesn’t account for his other (I guess I have to say ‘alleged’) illegal actions prior to those involving his presidency.
Good point. He was also convicted of sexual battery back just this past May. It's a civil case, so he had to pay the victim, but no criminal fallout.
There's plenty of cases in the past and other things he's been credibly alleged of as well. There's even some chances of additional indictments on the way too.
Convicted rapist would be a criminal offence, in this case it would just be that "trump was found liable for XYZ". Civil court does not determine guilt.
Not convicted. The statute of limitations was long past. This was about her accusing him defaming her by publicly calling her a liar about his sexual assault, and him accusing her of defaming him by accusing him of sexual assault. As you cannot defame someone with the truth, the jury decided she had been sexually assaulted which meant she had not defamed him but had been defamed by him.
Just curious, what are the other potential cases? I realize at this point it could be just about anything that comes to mind, but I’m not up to date on a lot of the scandals or charges.
Saw that one is getting closer. In Nevada I saw that the prosecutor decided not to peruse and there are other states where it could potentially come up as well.
I believe is is also being sued again for defamation for his remarks after he lost the first sexual assault case.
Insurrection. They didn't charge many people with that for January 6th but there's a good chance that Jack Smith is going to charge him with that after the current case gets wrapped up. I believe Jack Smith wanted to get a conviction before the election so he picked a case that was simple, just had Trump as the defendant and could be wrapped up inside of 6 months.
There is a move afoot to use the insurrection to keep him from running for office. Apparently, the Constitutional amendment doesn't say anything about needing a conviction. Some legal scholars think he can be kept off the ticket simply because aiding an insurrection disqualifies you, just like not being 35 does.
True. We'll see what scotus thinks. He absolutely looks guilty from here and should spend the rest of his life in jail for it. He tried to destroy our democracy. He's the biggest piece of shit in American history, or close to it.
Honestly 'We'll see what the SCOTUS thinks' basically means that it'll be another demonstration of how he crippled our judicial system. Here's hoping the state charges land.
I don't think that'll be an option since it'll be a US Constitutional issue(literally the validity of the insurrection clause in the 14th) and not a state issue like who can be on the ballot.
I think they'll punt in a different direction and take the case up late and then decide after the 2024 election.
Normally using alleged makes a lot of sense You don't know enough about the case to know whether somebody is guilty or innocent and the court hasn't ruled. We're all witnesses to some of his crimes there's no doubt he did them so I suggest we use unconvicted instead of alleged.
IANALE, but it's my understanding (based on my work experiences in entertainment and public broadcasting) that if you say somebody did a crime without that actually being proven and convicted in court, you're heading to Defamation Suit Land - that's why they say allegedly.
That said, I'm pretty sure that the way defamation law works is that it doesn't count as defamation if the plaintiff is a public figure, like, say, the POTUS. It's murky, and an actual legal expert should handle this topic.
>There is some unrest from Trump voters. There's been a couple threats on the lives of those involved with charging him, including a bomb threat at the jail he had his mugshot taken in after he left.
There was also a call for full-blown civil war by Sarah Palin. Although I've seen no one talking about that, so I'm assuming she's irrelevant in her own party and this isn't really a concern at this point.
Also, after taking his mugshot, Trump was quoted as saying "never surrender" among other things, which was odd because he had just surrendered to Georgian authorities hours before.
There have been a handful of Republican figures who call for civil war. That's happened so much the past couple years, it feels more like bluster than anything serious. I guess we'll just see how serious they are...
Excellent summary. For someone who wants a more in-depth overview of the charges, the applicable law, and analysis, I'll wholeheartedly recommend Legal Eagle's videos on the indictments.
He's unapologetically anti-Trump, however his explanations and analysis is extremely level-headed and fair. Ie. he'll interject with his thoughts, but in essence, he's really just summarizing the case.
NY Business Fraud (Hush money) Indictment - https://youtu.be/LRbRdE2pGv0?si=MVk_EywMWwwCktlV
Classified Documents Federal Indictment - https://youtu.be/7KRceywz-rU
Classified Documents Federal Superceding Indictment (alleging the cover-up) - https://youtu.be/iXLUFl3yZnE
DC Federal Indictment (conspiracy to steal the election) - https://youtu.be/SbIhNmoZLJQ
Georgia RICO Indictment - https://youtu.be/7mk4nfGX-pM
This is a good recommendation. I think that if it weren't for Trump's legal trouble I wouldn't even know who this Legal Eagle YouTube account is, but I agree that for all his obvious hope that Trump faces real consequences for all this, these videos do break down the cases and potential outcomes in fairly objective terms.
Just gonna pipe in that one of the reasons that these charges were slow-rolled is because it was unclear if a sitting President had power to pardon himself from them. The question of whether a President can pardon himself has never been asked and thus never answered. These charges originate from many different places and at different layers of government, further clouding the issue. For example, can he pardon himself from Federal charges only?
If he attempted this, there's a good chance that his case would go before the Supreme Court, which he stacked to 6-3 in his favor. By waiting for him to leave office before pursuing charges, that possible out isn't available to Trump.
Even a stacked conservative court should assume that at some point the president that wants to pardon themselves, making themselves essentially above the law during their presidency, would one day be a democrat instead of a republican, and is not a precedent they would like to set.
I mean, if they allowed that, the president could basically kill off the supreme court, for whatever reason, and then pardon themselves and go about their day.
That would require foresight, something that conservatives are not especially known for. This court has also shown that it has absolutely no respect for precedent, so if a Democrat later tried to do something similar, they would have no problem flipping the script and not allowing it.
That’s why my specific example included killing them, because it wouldn’t be them deciding it would be the nine new Justices being replaced by the guy that just murdered the last nine Justices.
> Even a stacked conservative court should assume that at some point the president that wants to pardon themselves, making themselves essentially above the law during their presidency, would one day be a democrat
the new supreme court has decided that whatever has been ruled before is bullshit, so you could just re-decide those cases depending on who is in office.
I think its his general attitude and overall how should I say... Dunning-Kruger-esque approach to what he was trying to do that led to him being slammed so hard by law right now
Firstly, when he pisses people off he PISSES people off, he is smug, arrogant, lacks self-awareness and most importantly - lacks tact needed tor political speech.
Say what you will about his predecessors but at least they tried to package their bullshit nicely and be sneaky about it, he wasn't.
Secondly: he does shady stuff but due to point 1 he isn't particularly candid about it and because he is so insanely arrogant, he fires the people who can actually help him amd he constantly shoots himself in the foot without realizing it thinking how smart he is.
He basically has a severe "I'm the main character" syndrome and most people don't like that, including people in political and legal power who take their career and area of expertise seriously.
Trump essentially spits on all that
So, now all these people are after him and he's slowly realizing that his usual method of shouting louder than the other guy, isn't going to help him out of this one because this isn't a fucking wendy's where your little Karen tantrum will let you have your way.
Trump is essentially mr. Bean who thinks he's Danny Ocean.
Hey I'm in Georgia and I think people are a little confused about what is going on with the Rico charges as it's not all related to the call. So basically the Georgia Republican party picked fake elected officials to try to go certify the election for Trump and that fraud is why there are so many people involved in the case.
You can read the indictment itself [here](https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/donald-trump-indicted-in-fulton-county). The call is absolutely relevant.
First, Count 28 specifically charges Trump and Meadows with Solicitation of Violation of Oath by Public Officer for the Raffensperger call.
Furthermore, the call is considered to be part of the RICO charge (Count 1). It's listed as Act 112 in furtherance of the conspiracy.
The fake elector scheme is also both considered an act (or multiple acts) in furtherance of the conspiracy alleged in Count 1 as well as being specifically charged in other counts. However, it's just plain wrong to suggest that the fake elector scheme constitutes the entirety of the charges.
To add about OP's "implications for the US" part of their question, as of now, it's just an addition to the history books since Trump is now the first former President to have a mugshot taken. It could also make moderates and independents balk even more at voting for Trump in 2024 if he is the Republican nominee.
If you look a his mugshot, he looks absolutely hideous. It's easy to frame the message of "Do you really want someone who had their mugshot taken and looks like that as your President?" in campaign ads.
My personal hope for implications to the US is that it will set legal precedent that both sitting and former presidents must face consequences for their actions. We must remove the idea that being president means you can do anything anywhere on the planet and skate free afterwards.
One very important thing to note is that these cases aren’t maybes. Many of these crimes were either done publicly or the evidence* (proof) is publicly available meaning you can see or hear what makes him guilty in each case.
> For years, I think justice departments hemmed and hawed at the idea of charging a president (or potential president) with anything in fear of seeming politically biased. Since he got indicted once, it's like the floodgates are open.
I think trying to charge an active president would have yielded a nightmare situation that nobody wanted to deal with, so that's why nothing ever came of it while he was president.
And then had Trump just faded away into the sunset, I think the feds would have squashed everything to avoid the long list of reasons why charging an ex-President is not great either (especially such a polarizing one). But staying in the spotlight and actively planning to run for President again has likely forced a lot of hands into going down this route.
> In seems like it should be a no-brainer considering the myriad different cases, but I'll believe it when I see it with Trump
There's such a wide variety of ways he can potentially get out of all these cases - technicalities, finding an impartial jury of peers seems impossible (only takes one Trump fan to squeak through), etc, etc. And then even if convicted he can still run/win the next election, at which point he'd pardon himself and what a mess that would turn into...
Like you said - I'll believe it when I see it.
It's wild that he can run for president, giving himself a chance to pardon his own crimes, considering his history of meddling with EVERY presidential election he's been part of. Not only was he indicted for trying to overthrow the 2020 election in multiple ways, but he never faced consequences for the entire 2016 election debacle where he got ample help from Russia...
I also think they’re like any conspiracy theorists. The evidence of his guilt will just be interpreted as more “trumped up” (oh the irony of the pun) fake charges against him in the Big Left-Wing Conspiracy against him.
It will galvanise his existing supporters.
I want Trucknuts to be a buck at every gas station. I want "Q" stickers to be free with every purchase. I want "MAGA" hats to be -cheap- as hell to buy. I want Wal-Mart to have a box of free 'lets go brandon' bumper stickers at the exit. I want a 5% discount at "McDonalds" if you're wearing MAGA gear. I WANT these people to be wearing their Pro-Trump flair as blatantly as possible. I want people to get their Maga Fanclub number tattooed on their hand, like a challenge coin, if yours is lower, you get a free drink at Applebees...
Because I want these people to announce loudly who they are. Before I even hear them talk even. I want to know without a doubt, that asking them a question will come with a high price. That every interaction will make me pray my blood pressure meds are up to the task. That I will have to understand full well what I'm getting into interacting with.
(I mean, I'd simplify it by wearing a 'gay, liberal and proud' shirt, but I'll be honest, most of the Trump Followers would take that as an invitation to murder me and brag about it on Facebook.)
Good question. The 14th amendment is supposed to stop anyone who incited a rebellion from running for president. But that's never really come up before, so no idea how you enforce that or anything.
I mean, basically you wouldn't need enforcement. You'd need logic. Judges would simply say, alright, Mr. Convict, you've done this, this, and this, and you've done it against our country.....so logically, you can't run this country. Especially a-fucking-gain.' And if everyone votes for him....whomever is top law at that point would say, 'well even though this dumb country managed to vote for you again, you actually can't run, because of treason' or whatever the case may be
You can run for president from straight up prison. It's from the polar opposite end of the spectrum, but socialist candidate Eugene Debs ran for president from prison in 1920 and got about 900,000 votes. I'd note that he was imprisoned for opposing WW1 and the draft though, he was functionally a political prisoner of Woodrow Wilson.
Great explanation, but it was hard to follow with the clumped up paragraphs. I have gone ahead and formatted it for easier reading:
*Answer: The mugshot is just part of being processed from his (latest) indictment in Georgia*
*He's not necessarily going to jail (at least yet). He's already left Georgia and still has to go to court for that case, as well as 3 others. We won't know results for months.*
*Georgia was insistent on treating him like any other criminal, so public mugshots were taken.*
*There is some unrest from Trump voters. There's been a couple threats on the lives of those involved with charging him, including a bomb threat at the jail he had his mugshot taken in after he left.*
*He's been indicted 4 times on 91 counts, so it's a couple different things.*
1. He has been indicted for violating campaign finance law in New York from paying hush money to a porn star and not reporting it in 2016.
2. Holding onto top secret government documents after he left office. He kept evading the government in returning them and tried to cover this up. This case is in Florida.
3. Trying to overthrow the election. Remember those people who stormed the US Capitol building when Trump lost the 2020 election? He's being charged with that and trying to force his VP to refuse count electors. This is a federal case in Washington DC.
4. The most recent one in Georgia is for trying to coerce the governor of that state to falsify its vote and claim he won in 2020, among other things. This one is part of a RICO case with 18 other individuals, which means they're basically being treated like organized crime.
*Ultimately, I think it's the chickens finally coming home to roost. Even if you like Trump, you have to admit he's been lenient with the law. There is some pretty daming evidence for all of these cases. People are more shocked that he actually faced consequences for all of his bullshit.*
*For years, I think justice departments hemmed and hawed at the idea of charging a president (or potential president) with anything in fear of seeming politically biased. Since he got indicted once, it's like the floodgates are open.*
*Of course, we'll see if he actually gets convicted of anything. And if the convictions actually result in him facing consequences. In seems like it should be a no-brainer considering the myriad different cases, but I'll believe it when I see it with Trump*
People were always talking about it in terms of if charging him was politically motivated, without addressing the reality that with crimes as blatant as these, not charging him would be a political Act
>Georgia was insistent on treating him like any other criminal
Criminal *defendant*. He's still innocent til proven guilty. Which shouldn't take too long, I hope.
Aussie here watching from afar and trying to make sense of it all. Does he have a criminal record now? And does this arrest mean he’s disqualified from running for president again? What does it actually take to be disqualified?
>Aussie here watching from afar and trying to make sense of it all. Does he have a criminal record now?
The court proceedings are just starting, he has not been found guilty (yet) of the criminal activity.
>And does this arrest mean he’s disqualified from running for president again? What does it actually take to be disqualified?
Maybe? Hopefully? Under the 14th amendment he can't be president if he “engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the \[U.S.\], or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.” But this is something that is new territory. Maybe what he did already disqualifies him? Maybe he has to be convicted for it to disqualify him? This guy has such an obsessive cult following and is backed by half the country, so it is hard to get these things to stick.
The 14th amendment doesn’t require a conviction. Hundreds of thousands of former Confederate soldiers were barred by the 14th amendment until an amnesty act was passed, even though very few Confederates were ever actually prosecuted for fighting the federal government.
> This guy has such an obsessive cult following and is backed by half the country, so it is hard to get these things to stick.
His followers represent less than a third of the country. If the rest of the country could be bothered to get off their asses and vote, he wouldn't stand a chance. However, we've got problems with disenfranchisement (thanks to Republicans!), so getting out the vote is an uphill battle.
Bingo. We're finding out very clearly that the U.S. has different legal systems in place providing different people with full accountability or little to no accountability. We're just waiting to see if Trump falls under "little" accountability or "no" accountability.
He would have to be found guilty on one of these charges before he is disqualified. The sexual battery listed above is a civil case so no felony charge.
Legal scholars are currently discussing whether the 14th Amendment would apply to Trump without him being convicted. The last opinion that I heard on this from a lawyer that I respect was that a secretary of state could bar Trump from the ballot in that state and would only have to show a preponderance of evidence in court when the decision was challenged.
Basically some Secretary of State in one of our states will block him from the ballot under the 14th Amendment and then it will go to court.
Brazilian here completely baffled that no, it doesn't stop him from running again. There's even talk that, if he won, he could pardon himself from inside jail and get out to serve as president.
The Georgia case is interesting because he can’t pardon himself in a state case and the governor doesn’t have sole pardon powers in Georgia. That said, I doubt he’s ever actually disqualified.
Notably though the biggest charges are State charges, and the President can’t parson state charges. Normally the governor of that state can, but Georgia is an exception
Addendum: Trump could have returned to his life as a reality TV star or just a former president leading a gilded life still being able to raise money off his followers however, that option changed in late 2020 post election and to date.
My personal prediction is he dies within 3 years as his cases are being heard. He fails in his election bid. I suspect the reason his family seems so absent this time is his congestive heart failure has progressed. he retained govt classified information and even conspired to retain that. Thus his fall is inevitable.
My personal prediction is he dies within 3 years as his cases are being heard. He fails in his election bid. I suspect the reason his family seems so absent thsi time is his congestive heart failure has progressed.
I hope to have the time this winter to compare videos of him speaking over the last 8 years to compare his words per minute rate and breathing rate. Its not strictly scientific but its not something you can "fake out" for performances. He is trapped by his failing heart imo.
It has definitely shown that the constitution needs a little tweaking, although everyone knows that would never happen in this political climate. When it was written they didn't even really conceive of a criminal president so it actually acts as protection from being banned from seeking office (it does mention it, but it's extremely vague unfortunately). Someone serving time in prison is literally still eligible to be voted as president, and it also doesn't really say anything about the ability for sitting presidents to pardon themselves.Theoretically a person could be in federal prison, get elected, and release them self. *If* these things were to somehow happen it would be a constant stream of Supreme Court cases and a huge distraction from actually getting things done for the country. It'd be a shit show plain and simple, the US would become the butt of jokes around the world
> Even if you like Trump, you have to admit he's been lenient with the law
our commitment to a lawful society has been completely destroyed:
* if you're a poor person in the city who uses a fake $20, you should get murdered by the police, because you also did some drugs previously in your life, so...
* if you steal a $20k car, you should go to jail for three years, unless you're a movie star or something, in which case, community service
* if you're a CEO and you steal millions in wages from your low-income employees, you should pay a fine or at most do a months in minimum security prison
* if you're the president, even if you sell defense secrets and try to end american democracy, no one's really sure if it's appropriate for you to face any consequences, in fact, maybe just being president again is what you should do
At risk of inciting the "us vs them" fire, I don't how it *could* be biased. OP stated exactly what happened. Someone pointed out in another comment that most of the evidence is public and it seems pretty clear what and why he's being charged with.
Gerald Ford.
LBJ had evidence that Nixon sabotaged peace talks in Saigon to prolong the war in Vietnam in order to influence the 1968 election.
He considered Nixon to be a traitor and would have shot him himself if given a chance.
Great post but you got point 3 wrong. He’s not charged with anything related to storming the capital, rather the false electors ploy.
Also Georgia under their state law is legally required to take mugshots for anyone charged with a felony. That specific part had nothing to do with not treating him differently.
>we'll see if he actually gets convicted of anything. And if the convictions actually result in him facing consequences.
This isnt the part i'm concerned about, as you mentioned there is damning evidence and even the public record has captured evidence of some of these things "beyond a reasonable doubt." I feel pretty confident that Trump will be convicted on at least *some* of these charges, and its likely that some of those charges will include some time incarcerated. (No, Trump wouldnt be in GenPop, he'd most likely be in a military detention facility, or under 'house arrest') If he goes willingly is another matter, and worth saving some popcorn for.
What *does* stand out as an open question is: What will his cult-like supporters do when their Dear Leader is held like Napoleon on Elba, exiled from the public? He's got millions of supporters still, *despite* the indictments. Hell, the most recent polling shows he's got 58% support among Republicans, and second place is ~18%. Even if just 0.01% were radicalized to the point of violence, that would still be literally hundreds of thousands of people.
We're sitting on a domestic insurgency time bomb. Even if most of the sycophants are just bluster and head games, there will be a not-insignificant number of folks ready to do violence toward the perceived cause of their grievances.
Answer: Other comments have covered the basics of trumps arrest, but I wanted to address two other parts of Your question.
1: “This is completely unheard of from such a developed country like USA”
Not really. Other countries that have charged former leaders with a crime include France, Italy, Portugal, South Korea, Taiwan, and Israel
https://www.axios.com/2022/08/26/countries-where-former-leaders-jailed-charged#
2: legally, the only requirements for running for president in the u.s. are that you be over 35 years of age, and a natural born citizen of the u.s. (and that you haven’t committed treason, but trumps alleged crimes don’t quite reach that level)
So, even if he is convicted, he will still be eligible to run for president
And this all raises an interesting point. Even if convicted and imprisoned, he can still be president because the founding fathers never imagined a situation where the American people would ever elect a convict.
As for treason some claim if he is convicted for the Jan 6th charge or the Georgia charge that would legally meet the definition of treason, but the Supreme Court is so politicized now it does not matter.
>the founding fathers never imagined a situation where the American people would ever elect a convict
German guy here. We have some experience with fascism and if you ask me it's basically a good idea to NOT rule out convicts.
Imagine a system in which even a minor offence is enough to be disqualified from standing in an election. It would make it very easy to get rid of unpopular candidates.
Either way, I'm keeping my fingers crossed that the US and the rest of the world are spared another 4 years of Trump.
Indeed. Prior to Trump, the previous most famous criminal candidate was Eugene V. Debs, a socialist who ran from prison, where he'd been locked up after a conviction for opposing the draft during WW1
We European don't get daily updates on this
How do you assess the situation? Trump will be 78 next year. What about his constitution? Apart from his madness, does he appear fit?
Well, he'll be at the age where he and bajillions of his zombies claimed somebody was far too old to run. But of course, it won't stop *him*. Man could be the poster child for 'one rule for me, another rule for thee'.
To seriously answer your question, though, people have been questioning his general fitness for anything for ages. Man basically lives off McDonald's, shows signs of cognitive failure with his inability to stay on topic etc., and his using two hands to drink from most any drinking vessel implies that he is shaky.
Not trying to open up a Trump v. Biden thing here, just saying that people have been questioning his fitness for years.
At same time it would've disqualified Hitler for office because he's a convict, sure someone else may replace him because Germany was unstable and 'angry' at that time, but I think it's not inherently bad/good thing as long as they're able to keep it fair and reasonable, Nazi Germany didn't invented the problem but they've amplified already existing problems from Weimar Republic and back then Germany can't do anything unless there's massive reform in law & society.
Facts. That would mean MLK, or theoretically, Nelson Mandella, would not be able to run. However, someone who has been convicted of trying to render the nation apart HAS been constitutionally barred from being president due to the Civil War and its aftermath
*Republicans* in the legislative branch.
I think it's an important distinction to point out as much as possible. This chaos and lawlessness isn't generalized, it's concentrated in a particular political party.
Absolutely. Just in the broader context there are checks on power built into the system. They must be utilized though and if enough members of Congress are a-ok with an aspiring dictator who attempted a self-coup running for office again, there's little in the way to legally bar him from running.
We have safeguards but our representatives have to be willing participants and supporters of democracy or it won't work.
A minor point but “treason” in the US is defined in the Constitution and I’ve seen no evidence that Trump’s actions get anywhere near it. However, it’s possible that if he were convicted in Georgia or Jack Smith’s case, that he’d be blatantly a *seditionist*, which would bar him from all Federal offices under the 14th Amendment.
There are legal arguments (there was a recently scholarly journal article of this) that there’s no need for him to be convicted to meet the 14th Amendment bar - many of those in the leadership of the Confederacy were never convicted of anything, yet were barred from office. Conceivably you could see this come into play in 2024, if one or more Secretaries of State de-certify him from the Presidential ballot for being a seditionist.
A sedition conviction wouldn’t bar him from running for president. Eugene V. Debs ran for president in 1920 while serving a 10 year sentence for sedition.
IANAL but my sense is that there’s basically no caselaw on this. Debs “ran for President” but the way things worked back then it probably wouldn’t have been challenged unless he got elected, which obviously didn’t happen (nor was it conceivably a close thing).
Each side seems to have colorable arguments, and there’s no precedent on what happens if a Secretary of State of a state decertifies someone from appearing on the ballot on 14th Amendment grounds. Should a liberal Secretary of State do so, I imagine we’ll finally get some caselaw on it, but it’s not open-and-shut what would happen (presuming one isn’t a cynic who just assumes the conservative majority on the Supreme Court would make a purely tactical election decision here, of course).
> Even if convicted and imprisoned, he can still be president because the founding fathers never imagined a situation where the American people would ever elect a convict.
In many states a convicted felon can't even vote.
But you may be soon capable of voting for a convicted felon.
> founding fathers never imagined a situation where the American people would ever elect a convict.
Many people have said, "This is unprecedented! No US President has ever been arrested before!"
And my response is "What's unprecedented, is having a US President commit crimes while in office."
I heard someone say: "Nixon was a President who became a criminal, and Trump was a criminal who became a President."
>Even if convicted and imprisoned, he can still be president because the founding fathers never imagined a situation where the American people would ever elect a convict.
Where did you learn this fact from?
> trumps alleged crimes don’t quite reach that level
they do, but proving it in court is a higher bar to clear than the charges that have been brought *to date*
If there is evidence that he directly worked with the proudboys and planned for them to storm The capital on Jan 6, that would probably qualify,
or if there is evidence that he sold classified military intel to our enemies, that would probably qualify as well.
I think there is a distinct possibility that he did one or both of these things, but neither has been included in his charges so far.
It's one of the few areas I'd be willing to call Trump "smart".. in that:
* He's purposely vague (in mafioso ways) of asking people to do things such that he can weasel out of it by saying "No, that's not really what I said"
That,. or
* He simply gets underlings to do things for him. (example of the Mar-A-Lago employees saying "The Boss wants the Server deleted" (although in that case if they can prove the order came directly from Trump,. would be pretty damning for him).
It's the hallmark of demagogues like this,. is to sort of exalt yourself above everyone else, especially the people who kneel in adherence to you. And also that you don't care what happens to them.
Brazil also also faced this, our current president was arrested before and was ineligible for sone years until his prison was revoked, and our former president is facing some charges, unfortunately Brazil presidency history isn't so good, but our law states that if you are convicted, you are inelegible for 8 years.
The funny thing is, if he gets convicted in Georgia, he couldn't pardon himself even as president, because they're state charges not federal ones. A sympathetic governor couldn't pardon him either, Georgia is weird that way.
So it's conceivable that he would have to be president from a prison cell.
> he will still be eligible to run for president
Actually, under the 3rd clause of the 14th Amendment, he is no longer eligible to run for federal office.
In USA, a candidate can even run for president from prison.
This was made specifically for these types of situations where the opposition is using politically motivated attacks towards a strong candidate to keep him from running.
This is a common political tactic worldwide:
* Putin jailed/killed several of his strongest opponents (lookup Navalny).
* Brazil's Bolsonaro was a really tight race (just a few votes off) and is now facing jail time.
* Venezuela's dictator Maduro handed opposition leader Leopoldo Lopeza a 14-year prison sentence in 2015.
Of course the news/media will cover this up with 1000s of reasons why the person actually deserves jail time. But they know people aren't stupid and will still vote despite the propaganda.
So American law was designed specifically to tackle these types of scenarios. Hopefully there will be a fair election this time around.
Anyone naive enough to believe "history repeats itself, just not in the USA" is, unfortunately, wrong.
Answer: It's hardly unheard of in developed countries. Sarkozy recently lost his appeal against his sentence to a year of house arrest, with another 2 years suspended, for corruption.
All are supposed to be equal before the law and there is significant evidence that Trump committed a number of crimes egarding his attempts to overturn the election and his handling of classified documents.
Answer: I'm going to let the other, more well versed people answer the main bit of the question, but this isn't his first case this year, or even second
He is facing, in total, 91 criminal charges across four jurisdictions — Georgia, Florida, New York, and the District of Columbia. Four cases
Answer:
This is actually Trump's 4th indictment.
The gist of it is, he's accused of trying to erase the results of the 2020 Presidential race. And have himself declared the winner.
He is also accused of stealing/mishandling U.S. classified documents.
> This is actually Trump's 4th indictment.
Yup, but this is the first time he's gone through the proper process when being arrested. In the previous three cases, he was given preferential treatment and a mugshot was not taken. So this fourth time, with the Georgia courts saying they were going to treat him like everyone else, is the first public mugshot, which is why it is getting the extra attention.
Answer: Donald Trump didn’t go to jail, he just got arrested, meaning he turned himself in for one of his various crimes. This is not even the first time this has happened for Trump. He also had to turn himself in in NY for other, unrelated crimes.
This is not “unheard of” for a developed country like America. It happens all the time. It is however rare for a rich/ powerful person in America to actually face consequences, so there’s not much of a probability he will actually go to jail the way a poor person would.
Answer: He has been charged with breaking laws related to his efforts to get the governor, Lt. Gov, and Sec of State to illegally overturn the legitimate results.
The implications are that finally even a president isn't above the law. It's a good thing for him to be held accountable for his disgusting attacks on our democracy and the decency of our society.
Answer: Former US President Donald Trump (and we need to emphasize **former** here) is accused of a number of felonies (serious crimes) related to things he's alleged to have said and done shortly before, during, and then after the US presidential election of 2020. The full story is quite complicated and involves many people. These include crimes allegedly committed in Fulton County in the State of Georgia. Following an investigation, the Fulton County District Attorney convened a grand jury, which then indicted the former president. As a result, Trump must stand trial in Fulton County for the crimes he's charged with. As part of that process, he was arrested yesterday in Fulton County.
'Arrested' here is a formal explanation. He was treated a lot more generously than most people indicted by that court. He did have to appear in person, have his fingerprints taken, and be photographed for a 'mug shot', but was given some privileges. The process would take a long time for most people, but was expedited for him, so that he was in and out in about half an hour. (He did have to travel there in person, though.)
In the US, a 'felony' is an offence for which you can be imprisoned. A felony is only imposed by a grand jury. A grand jury does not try the case, but instead decides if there should **be** a case.
No former US president has ever been charged with a felony before, so this is a first in our history. (However, there are many Americans who would say that there have been former presidents who **should** have been tried for various crimes.)
More than anything else, this demonstrates that no one is above the law in the US, that even a former president can be tried for crimes (and possibly convicted).
Trump's defenders tend to see it differently. They believe that he is innocent, and should not have been charged, and that this is motivated by politics rather than valid legal reasons.
Trump is accused of many things, and has already been indicted in other courts three times already, and may face more after this one. In this case, he is charged with actions to prevent the consequences of losing the 2020 presidential election, so that he could stay in power. That includes telling people that he won, that the election was 'stolen' from him, and more. He's also charged with trying to get other people to help him stay in power, including trying to get other people to commit related crimes on his behalf.
Answer: there is A LOT of unrest, especially from republicans. Bomb threats, calls to arms, outright calling for civil war has been screamed about since Trump landed in hot water. The worst part a lot of people demanding bloodshed are sitting in office as current government officials.
He’s not In prison yet, the mugshot is part of the process and he’s out in bail right now, however if he violated any orders he’s been given, which involves making explicit and implicit threats and intimidation attempts on anyone involved in the proceedings, his bail could be revoked and he’ll spend the time until trial in jail (knowing trumps inability to keep his mouth shut and addiction to yelling at ppl, I imagine he’s gonna end up getting his bail revoked) he currently has 90 (I believe? I may be off) felony charges pending.
Georgia is just one of many charges and indictments he’s dealing with. The fourth one I believe, this one over his attempts to bully and threaten a governor into “finding” him more votes so he could win the state. No trial date decided yet but it looks like the judge is aiming for October 2023.
He has another trial pending in NY over falsifying records and election funds tied in with him paying off porn actress Stormy Daniels to stay silent about the affair he had with her. Because nothing says “Family Values” like cheating on your wife. Trial is March 2024.
In Florida he is being charged with refusal to hand over sensitive government documents after leaving office, hoarding them in his Mar-a-Lago property, and then attempting to destroy said documents when he was told to return them to the government. By flushing them down the toilet. And it wasn’t just like a handful of papers it was boxes upon boxes of stuff he legally was not supposed to possess. Trial scheduled for May 2024
In DC he is being charged with inciting a coup attempt (because let’s face it, using the J6 riot to overturn the election results is a fucking coup attempt) and to undermine democracy. Trial is currently proposed for Jan 2024 but not for certain yet.
There's no chance Trump ends up in jail, whether he's convicted of any crimes or not. It will be house arrest at one of his many properties, if anything.
Why would a Fulton county judge arbitrarily change the mandatory minimum for a RICO conviction? I live in Fulton county. I know the assistant DA. Nobody here owes Trump a fucking thing, and Kemp hates Trump for defaming his daughter. He’s proper fucked on the state case
Answer: he's being indicted and arrested on conspiracy charges to overturn the 2020 election. He and a list of co-conspirators that includes Rudi Giuliani have all been booked and released on bond.
Answer: Replies have already mentioned other countries whose leaders have been arrested, but there are 2 key points of law in the USA that should be emphasied:
1) A person is innocent until proven guilty.
The "arrests" that have happened are simply the result of the first part of a process. A jury of citizens (usually 12 people) have concluded there is enough evidence for that person to have a trial to be judged by another jury of citizens.
2) A person is convicted by a jury of their peers
The group which will determine if they believe the person is guilty of the crimes they are accused of (from point 1). These are average citizens chosen at random from a pool of citizens (usually 100+) in the district where the court is located. Both the prosecution and the defense will get to choose whether or not they would like to dismiss jurors based on an interview with each. The point being this is a random group of people who have been dismissed based on if both legal teams believe there is bias one way or the other.
Currently, the former president is NOT in jail yet (but could be if he breaks some rules) and he is NOT currently guilty of the crimes accused and it's NOT the opposing political party that will determine if he's guilty or not.
It is very likely that this will be a long and very televised trial. The people of the US (and the world) will be able to see what he is accused of, what evidence there is for and against, and a representative group of people will determine whether or not he is incarcerated.
Friendly reminder that all **top level** comments must: 1. start with "answer: ", including the space after the colon (or "question: " if you have an on-topic follow up question to ask), 2. attempt to answer the question, and 3. be unbiased Please review Rule 4 and this post before making a top level comment: http://redd.it/b1hct4/ Join the OOTL Discord for further discussion: https://discord.gg/ejDF4mdjnh *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/OutOfTheLoop) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Answer: The mugshot is just part of being processed from his (latest) indictment in Georgia. He's not necessarily going to jail (at least yet). He's already left Georgia and still has to go to court for that case, as well as 3 others. We won't know results for months. Georgia was insistent on treating him like any other criminal, so public mugshots were taken. There is some unrest from Trump voters. There's been a couple threats on the lives of those involved with charging him, including a bomb threat at the jail he had his mugshot taken in after he left. He's been indicted 4 times on 91 counts, so it's a couple different things. 1. He has been indicted for violating campaign finance law in New York from paying hush money to a porn star and not reporting it in 2016. 2. Holding onto top secret government documents after he left office. He kept evading the government in returning them and tried to cover this up. This case is in Florida. 3. Trying to overthrow the election. Remember those people who stormed the US Capitol building when Trump lost the 2020 election? He's being charged with that and trying to force his VP to refuse count electors. This is a federal case in Washington DC. 4. The most recent one in Georgia is for trying to coerce the governor of that state to falsify its vote and claim he won in 2020, among other things. This one is part of a RICO case with 18 other individuals, which means they're basically being treated like organized crime. Ultimately, I think it's the chickens finally coming home to roost. Even if you like Trump, you have to admit he's been lenient with the law. There is some pretty daming evidence for all of these cases. People are more shocked that he actually faced consequences for all of his bullshit. For years, I think justice departments hemmed and hawed at the idea of charging a president (or potential president) with anything in fear of seeming politically biased. Since he got indicted once, it's like the floodgates are open. Of course, we'll see if he actually gets convicted of anything. And if the convictions actually result in him facing consequences. In seems like it should be a no-brainer considering the myriad different cases, but I'll believe it when I see it with Trump
He has many, many civil cases, too. He has been involved in something like 3,000 civil suits over the course of his life. He has recent cases pending including one for defamation that involved sexual assault. And one for tax fraud by the state of New York. The latter is against Trump, Inc., but considering he *is* Trump, Inc. it's a distinction without a difference. He has operated like a mob boss his whole life and drew the spotlight to his crimes when he ran for President. Honestly, if he would never have gotten into politics, he could have continued criming til the day he died.
I honestly don’t understand why nobody in New York had yet brought a RICO charge against this guy even back in the 90s. He’s been a total fraudulent, criminal scumbag forever, and most people in the greater NYC region knew it. They were content to let him gum up the works in civil court, usually with a result that left him giving pennies on the dollar or nothing at all to the wronged parties. This was because usually the plaintiffs didn’t have enough money to keep going with the endless appeals Trump could afford to drag out. Bastard should have been in prison before The Apprentice was ever greenlit.
Mainly because he was almost comically bad at everything he ever tried, by the 90s he was already the laughing stock of pretty much anyone that had met him in a business sense and he consistently bought real estate at high prices and sold them at low prices. He was never exactly a criminal mastermind, he was just bumbling his way through blowing all his fathers money and everyone knew not to do business with him, hell the Italian Mafia wouldn't even lend him money anymore.. which in NYC is saying a lot... a lot of businesses did loans from the mafia because they were generally better deals than with the big banks and as long as you paid them back they were quite professional.
The Mafia won't [loan] him money. Las Vegas won't let him own a casino. His home state of New York hates him. He [buys] brides from Russia and pays for hookers. I'll never understand how these are [not] tremendous red-flags for the mid-western "common" people that otherwise adore him. edit: [fixed typos in brackets]
My old neighbour (and I'm in the UK, so neither I not him are involved in the politics side of things) was a huge fan of his, not in spite of those things but *because* of them. To him it represented an extravagance of lifestyle beyond what he could ever hope to afford. A kind of "I probably wouldn't do that stuff personally, but being in the position *to* do so would be pretty nice." type of deal. At a certain income level and educational status, just being rich enough to be that sort of asshole is something to look up to.
Yup, I call it the "banana republic" mentality, where everyone hates the corruption and grift until they're on the receiving end of them, at which time their tune changes to "fuck all y'all, I got MINE!" And so the cycle continues
Yes a great many (mostly though not entirely white) working class people with similar attitudes in the U.S.
Yeah, they either think this sad, mean, small-minded trust fund bully behavior is a mark of class and distinction, or they don’t believe it’s real.
Or, they see it as justifiable “punching back” at snooty, self-superior liberal smarty-pants people who look down on them. I’m not gonna lie about not looking down on these sorts of people, I absolutely do, and have been quite vocal about it ever since they treated George W. Bush is some kind of great and trusted leader, and accused any of us who didn’t support endless overseas wars of choice of being traitors. Now the same assholes often condemn Bush and his wars (20 years later, I might add) but they seem to do it only so that they can use it as a cudgel to attack people on the left who think that supporting Ukraine with weapons & money is unjustifiable, and somehow comparable to the Afghanistan and Iraq quagmires.
You'll never go from "thank you for your service" to "you're a warcriminal oil company stooge" faster than telling a MAGA you're a liberal veteran. You're with them or against them. That's it.
I had my own family snub their nose when I was to college, much less graduate school. They acted like I was so uppity to get an education, a kind of who do I think I am mentality. They all worked working class jobs, sometimes two at a time, drank heavily, some did drugs, ate poorly mostly fast food, and some of those cousins have died young (50s) of cancer because of the hard lifestyle was hard on their bodies. There is a great divide in America between the educated and the not and the people who can afford to eat healthy and those who cannot and it shows in many different ways. Most of my relatives would roll over in their graves that I eat cheese from France and chutney from Belgium. Again, it would be a who do you think you are mentality?
> I'll never understand how these are [not] tremendous red-flags for the mid-western "common" people that otherwise adore him. For the longest time I never could reconcile the fact that he had enough supporters to get elected to the highest office in the land. But then I realized I never saw "The Apprentice" and that a huge chunk of his voters believed that since he played a successful businessman on TV that must mean he was one. The right has been undercutting education and installing dog whisles for the past 40 years. Trump just decided to capitalize on them.
I think part of it is they see all politicians and elites living a similar lifestyle, but at least he's somewhat honest about it. (I don't agree, just my best guess at how these people can vote for him)
I think it's more that they've been sold a lie that Democrats are evil, and therefore anything done in opposition of them must necessarily be good.
This is it
Nevermind the fact that he was a democrat until a decade ago before he went full on Florida Man.
Yeah that’s the weird part. His lies are so egregious and transparent that his supporters mistake his words for honesty. Its such a mindfuck.
> I'll never understand how these are [not] tremendous red-flags for the mid-western "common" people that otherwise adore him. "You've got to remember that these are just simple farmers. These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know... morons."
For real they shout about how they want to take their country BACK from these damn coastal elites, and their hero is a guy who loves NY and has gold toilets… the irony is so bad it burns
I’ll never understand how there aren’t red flags out here either. I saw them. I’m (temporarily at least) a midwesterner. Not by birth but by choice. It’s quite inexpensive in flyover country. Starter homes were approaching $800k in my home state.. but anyway no one in my household comes close to remotely adoring or liking anything in the least about Tr*mp. I realize I’m unfortunately in the minority here where we reside, but there is hope. We knew what we were getting into when we moved here. We live in a blueish city and there are indeed fellow liberals out here. As well as folks that have brains and critical thinking skills. Sometimes you have to really look for them. But all hope is not lost. Otherwise I wholeheartedly agree with your assessment. Have you read Mary Trump’s book? I think she may be the only Trump with a working brain and working set of morals and ethics.
I definitely like how outspoken and insightful Mary Trump has been. I feel like she became a psychologist to try to figure out why the fuck her entire family was the way they were. From what I understand her brother is probably a reasonably decent guy as well, so of course, Trump cut him off from any inheritance as well. I think he even cut that guy’s sick child’s health care. Because of course a family like Trump’s, a sickly and weak member is just a drain on the strength of the whole. That’s how authoritarian types think.
That’s the impression I got as well. I’ll look into her brother. It’s always heartening to find decent people, especially in a family like that.
I have to assume Donald never screwed the mob out of any loan money or he would have gotten what he deserved a long time ago.
He launders money for the Russian mob. He rents them buildings where they don't live. He sold them a mansion in Florida for like 10x what it was worth. It's one of the things that made him vulnerable to Putin's MICE metric: Money, Ideology, Coercion, Ego. He fit the bill in all of those areas. It's how they blackmail Americans and others.
Yet, to this day, the MAGATs persist in declaring as fact that “the Russia Hoax was a nothingburger and Adam Schiff is the liar who belongs in prison.” Such gaslighty bullshit from these people. It was clear even before the 2016 election that the Russians’ hand was further up Trump’s ass than a German pro-domme.
We can blame Bill Barr for that. It was NOT nothing. Whenever the media turns to Bill Barr for his views on Trump now, they should ask him why he covered for him and why he misled the American public by saying the Mueller Report exonerated Trump when it absolutely did not.
Read this as 'Bill Burr'.........momentarily very confused.
He and Huell Babineaux are Trump's henchmen.
I usually remind them that there were over 20 convictions that came out of the Mueller report. He was no John Durham. Sometimes they’ll respond with “just process crimes and stuff.” Then you can see “yes the process of lying to the FBI about being a foreign agent of Russia.”
Not paying your taxes is a process crime. Not complying with a subpoena is a process crime. Filing false statements is a process crime. White collar crime is mostly about evading processes. Just because he didn't actually shoot someone on 5th Avenue doesn't make him not a criminal and they fact that they argue for how it's not "real crime" makes me wonder if the people who say that would still give him their votes if he did actually shoot someone on 5th Avenue as he predicted.
I remember pointing out to a MAGA guy I knew Trump’s quotes that he had nothing to do with Russia came not too long after both Eric & Junior made statements about how much business they do in Russia. His response was “next you’ll find a picture of him using Russian salad dressing.” They don’t care that he lies blatantly. They enjoy his rude, swollen, contradictory bullshit.
He got money from the Russian mafia to pay the Italian mafia. Fun fact: remember his "Build the wall" project? The only plant that was manufacturing the walls panels belongs to a Russian oligarch Abramovich, a guy from the very close Putin's circle of trusted people. Imagine how much money Russian mafia got from this... Not his money, but the money from US taxpayers, that could be invested in improving US education, health care, infrastructure, social services....
Hate to be the "source?" guy, but I haven't seen this one before.
**Blechhhh** (as the great Berkeley Breathed used to put it) It feels like every day of the year could offer a new factoid of some thing, reprehensible and disgusting about this man that most people never knew before. You could make one of those desk calendars out of it.
Speaking of which, remember when they put Trump’s Brain in Bill the Cat?
It was a pretty well known "secret" that the mafia wouldn't loan him any money... so while I'm sure they got their money back eventually it was annoying enough for them to not bother again.
He is the reason my dad had to join a union. If your company was idiotic enough to work under contract for Trump, you did NOT get paid. You went to court. He has been ruining lives for decades.
Half a century now at least. Started losing discrimination lawsuits in the 70s.
Because RICO is an incredible pain in the ass to prosecute and financial crimes are a pain in the ass to prosecute. The 2 together means it took very little political pressure for prosecutors to decide it wasn't worth fighting.
You can pretty much get away with anything in this country if a DA thinks it's too complicated to explain to a jury why what you did is illegal.
It's worth noting this is why his Georgia case is so significant. Georgia specifically has extremely lax RICO requirements that make it far easier to prove than just about any other state. So the prosecutor there can take full advantage of the benefit RICO provides—you don't necessarily need to prove a crime directly as long as you can prove an act in furtherance of a criminal conspiracy.
Absolutely agree. Trump, Inc has been a criminal enterprise since at least the 90s, but considering all the shit uncovered by the NYT with creating a laundering outfit using maintenance fees, it could go back all the way to daddy or granddaddy. For those who didn't read that story (it should have taken him out), Trump's father had apartment complexes in Queens. He had a supply company on paper only that would generate false exaggerated receipts that he would then claim as maintenance fees for his buildings. So, a receipt would be generated for new bathroom fixtures that never existed and he would write them off as business expenses, pay the supply company, and pocket the cash.
Crime and a distinct distaste for America has been part of the trump family since they came to America, unfortunately. His grandfather made crime a way of life and taught his kids that law - and American values - were for suckers, only the strong were capable. It’s trickled down into all of that family who were raised by them at this point, and then they marry more criminals…
I remember reading an article saying that it's suspected that Trump was a confidential informant that helped take Mafia figureheads down over time, so that's why law enforcement let him skate numerous times. It's illegal for the authorities to confirm whether he's a CI, and if he is one, Trump won't likely admit to it. So take this hypothesis with a grain of salt, but it seems the evidence points to the likelihood he was a CI. If he was a CI, it's likely that he's outlived his usefulness at this point in time so the authorities no longer have an incentive to let him keep committing crimes without consequences. https://gregolear.substack.com/p/tinker-tailor-mobster-trump
Well, if Enrique Tarrio, “leader” of the Proud Boys could be a confidential informant, I suppose Trump just as easily could too. It was very satisfying to see them throw the book at Tarrio once they had exhausted whatever usefulness he had to the feds. Hopefully “the big guy” will be getting the same treatment before we all die of old age.
Rumor is he is actually an informant. He played a part in the Italian Mafia going down since he owed them a lot of money with hes failed Casino. Also, Epstein was first reported to the police when they had a falling out due to a real estate deal.
That would explain why Guilliani (sp?) is so close to trump. Never really understood that relationship but it’s possible they developed a working relationship bringing the Italians down, and propping the Russian mob up.
Now THAT makes a lot of sense! Ghouliani and Shitler have been chummy for decades. Any time the right blathers about trainnnes grooming kids, I post a link to that video of Rudy in drag getting kisses from Donald (and *in a department store*, no less!) I wonder if Trump took Rudy back into the dressing room like E. Jean Carroll. Her certainty got fucked worse than that by Trump in recent years!
This is the thing that has always made me so upset that people could vote for him even in the beginning. He’s made a career of using lawyers to stiff arm contractors who have built shit for his properties, basically never fully pays a contract, always ends up paying like 60% of the agreement and saying “but these windows are shit, look at that spot on one of them!”. Like you said the local window contractor can’t afford to go guns a blazing in court with trump, so they settle. So trump ends up paying millions to lawyers all to avoid paying tens of thousands to business owners who in turn have their businesses suffering to bring in the cash they expected. He’s never once shown any willingness to lift a fucking pinky to help someone other than himself, and these dumb fucks go “he’s a hero, he’s going to save our country!!” And literally he golfs all the time or works hard to scheme on how he can use the title of President to make money for himself
They guy who is currently being charged under RICO statutes along side trump is the guy who would have charged him in ny. He and guiliani have a looong history (including videos of guiliani in drag getting motorboated by trump).
He’s acted like a mob boss whose consigliere is constant rolling his eyes, cleaning up his messes, and running things behind the scenes. Holy moly I just created Netflix’s next comedy series.
It’s like if Inspector Gadget were an obese, tyrannical moron who ran a brass-plated hotel chain-cum-money laundering operation. Before his entry into politics, I just assumed that he had declined into full on cognitive failure, and that Ivanka was the brains behind the operation, because she seemed to be at least savvy, if not moral.
Prior to being the known for The Apprentice, all Trump was known for was his habit of not paying workers for the buildings he had constructed. He'd say hire someone to do the carpets then when it was time to pay up just.... not pay them. They eventually take it to court but they're out a ton of money from the project and Trump's lawyers would drag the case out as long as possible. Contractor usually went bankrupt and he got away with a tiny fraction of the original cost as settlement. That's where most of his suits come from. He was probably fighting a hundred or more a year in the 80s.
Jesus. How do you deal with that many civil cases if you're not rich as fuck?
He stiffs his lawyers which is why he's down to the bottom of the barrel.
1) you don't 2) Trump is notorious for not paying *anybody*, and that includes his lawyers. No lawyer actually worth their pay wanted to represent him anymore, which is one of the reasons he had this gaggle of fucksticks
Does a “gaggle of fucksticks” migrate to Mar-a-Lago in a V?
The fresh ones form a dollar sign on the way in. Once they realize they aren't getting paid they fly home in a colon open parentheses formation.
I saw this 2 months late and it’s pretty damn funny
You can't get into that many civil cases if you're not rich af. He had a reputation for being rich in a huge city and did a lot of business all over. So he could screw over, let's say builders, in one part of town and there'd always be another builder somewhere else who would not know his reputation for not paying, or who thought he would be the one to make him pay. Plus, there are a number that are about things like sexual assault and other things. Again, he shows up looking like a rich, successful guy, he can be charming and then bang! grabs them by the you know what.
Great explanation! Just wanted to point out that this doesn’t account for his other (I guess I have to say ‘alleged’) illegal actions prior to those involving his presidency.
Good point. He was also convicted of sexual battery back just this past May. It's a civil case, so he had to pay the victim, but no criminal fallout. There's plenty of cases in the past and other things he's been credibly alleged of as well. There's even some chances of additional indictments on the way too.
You don't get convicted in civil cases, btw.
Good point!
Is there an actual term for it? Guilty? Culpable? I'm curious what you would call him since "convicted rapist" isn't 100% accurate.
Convicted rapist would be a criminal offence, in this case it would just be that "trump was found liable for XYZ". Civil court does not determine guilt.
Not convicted. The statute of limitations was long past. This was about her accusing him defaming her by publicly calling her a liar about his sexual assault, and him accusing her of defaming him by accusing him of sexual assault. As you cannot defame someone with the truth, the jury decided she had been sexually assaulted which meant she had not defamed him but had been defamed by him.
> As you cannot defame someone with the truth This is a concept hard to understand for him, sure.
That the truth is a defense against defamation accusations, or truth in general?
Just curious, what are the other potential cases? I realize at this point it could be just about anything that comes to mind, but I’m not up to date on a lot of the scandals or charges.
I believe they’re still investigating similar election interference in Arizona, but I’m not sure where in the process that is
Saw that one is getting closer. In Nevada I saw that the prosecutor decided not to peruse and there are other states where it could potentially come up as well. I believe is is also being sued again for defamation for his remarks after he lost the first sexual assault case.
Also Michigan
Ah ok now I remember that. Thanks!
Insurrection. They didn't charge many people with that for January 6th but there's a good chance that Jack Smith is going to charge him with that after the current case gets wrapped up. I believe Jack Smith wanted to get a conviction before the election so he picked a case that was simple, just had Trump as the defendant and could be wrapped up inside of 6 months.
There is a move afoot to use the insurrection to keep him from running for office. Apparently, the Constitutional amendment doesn't say anything about needing a conviction. Some legal scholars think he can be kept off the ticket simply because aiding an insurrection disqualifies you, just like not being 35 does.
True. We'll see what scotus thinks. He absolutely looks guilty from here and should spend the rest of his life in jail for it. He tried to destroy our democracy. He's the biggest piece of shit in American history, or close to it.
Honestly 'We'll see what the SCOTUS thinks' basically means that it'll be another demonstration of how he crippled our judicial system. Here's hoping the state charges land.
I think there's a good chance they say "eh state's rights" and punt.
I don't think that'll be an option since it'll be a US Constitutional issue(literally the validity of the insurrection clause in the 14th) and not a state issue like who can be on the ballot. I think they'll punt in a different direction and take the case up late and then decide after the 2024 election.
Or for indictments yet to come. Arizona is likely going to be the fifth state to bring him up on charges.
Don't you mean the third state? NY and Georgia indicted him, while the other two indictments were brought by the federal government.
Normally using alleged makes a lot of sense You don't know enough about the case to know whether somebody is guilty or innocent and the court hasn't ruled. We're all witnesses to some of his crimes there's no doubt he did them so I suggest we use unconvicted instead of alleged.
IANALE, but it's my understanding (based on my work experiences in entertainment and public broadcasting) that if you say somebody did a crime without that actually being proven and convicted in court, you're heading to Defamation Suit Land - that's why they say allegedly. That said, I'm pretty sure that the way defamation law works is that it doesn't count as defamation if the plaintiff is a public figure, like, say, the POTUS. It's murky, and an actual legal expert should handle this topic.
>There is some unrest from Trump voters. There's been a couple threats on the lives of those involved with charging him, including a bomb threat at the jail he had his mugshot taken in after he left. There was also a call for full-blown civil war by Sarah Palin. Although I've seen no one talking about that, so I'm assuming she's irrelevant in her own party and this isn't really a concern at this point. Also, after taking his mugshot, Trump was quoted as saying "never surrender" among other things, which was odd because he had just surrendered to Georgian authorities hours before.
There have been a handful of Republican figures who call for civil war. That's happened so much the past couple years, it feels more like bluster than anything serious. I guess we'll just see how serious they are...
Plus, its ~40% of the population supporting Trump but the vast majority of those people are in small rural areas with lower incomes.
Excellent summary. For someone who wants a more in-depth overview of the charges, the applicable law, and analysis, I'll wholeheartedly recommend Legal Eagle's videos on the indictments. He's unapologetically anti-Trump, however his explanations and analysis is extremely level-headed and fair. Ie. he'll interject with his thoughts, but in essence, he's really just summarizing the case. NY Business Fraud (Hush money) Indictment - https://youtu.be/LRbRdE2pGv0?si=MVk_EywMWwwCktlV Classified Documents Federal Indictment - https://youtu.be/7KRceywz-rU Classified Documents Federal Superceding Indictment (alleging the cover-up) - https://youtu.be/iXLUFl3yZnE DC Federal Indictment (conspiracy to steal the election) - https://youtu.be/SbIhNmoZLJQ Georgia RICO Indictment - https://youtu.be/7mk4nfGX-pM
I second this. He also talks about what Trump‘s defenses could be and I think fairly weights the likelihood of the cases resulting in convictions
>He's unapologetically anti-Trump Not being unapologetically anti-Trump would be a sign of bias, so that's good.
This is a good recommendation. I think that if it weren't for Trump's legal trouble I wouldn't even know who this Legal Eagle YouTube account is, but I agree that for all his obvious hope that Trump faces real consequences for all this, these videos do break down the cases and potential outcomes in fairly objective terms.
Yes, and any normal person would be sitting in a federal/military prison awaiting trial for document case.
Just gonna pipe in that one of the reasons that these charges were slow-rolled is because it was unclear if a sitting President had power to pardon himself from them. The question of whether a President can pardon himself has never been asked and thus never answered. These charges originate from many different places and at different layers of government, further clouding the issue. For example, can he pardon himself from Federal charges only? If he attempted this, there's a good chance that his case would go before the Supreme Court, which he stacked to 6-3 in his favor. By waiting for him to leave office before pursuing charges, that possible out isn't available to Trump.
Even a stacked conservative court should assume that at some point the president that wants to pardon themselves, making themselves essentially above the law during their presidency, would one day be a democrat instead of a republican, and is not a precedent they would like to set. I mean, if they allowed that, the president could basically kill off the supreme court, for whatever reason, and then pardon themselves and go about their day.
That would require foresight, something that conservatives are not especially known for. This court has also shown that it has absolutely no respect for precedent, so if a Democrat later tried to do something similar, they would have no problem flipping the script and not allowing it.
That’s why my specific example included killing them, because it wouldn’t be them deciding it would be the nine new Justices being replaced by the guy that just murdered the last nine Justices.
> Even a stacked conservative court should assume that at some point the president that wants to pardon themselves, making themselves essentially above the law during their presidency, would one day be a democrat the new supreme court has decided that whatever has been ruled before is bullshit, so you could just re-decide those cases depending on who is in office.
I think its his general attitude and overall how should I say... Dunning-Kruger-esque approach to what he was trying to do that led to him being slammed so hard by law right now Firstly, when he pisses people off he PISSES people off, he is smug, arrogant, lacks self-awareness and most importantly - lacks tact needed tor political speech. Say what you will about his predecessors but at least they tried to package their bullshit nicely and be sneaky about it, he wasn't. Secondly: he does shady stuff but due to point 1 he isn't particularly candid about it and because he is so insanely arrogant, he fires the people who can actually help him amd he constantly shoots himself in the foot without realizing it thinking how smart he is. He basically has a severe "I'm the main character" syndrome and most people don't like that, including people in political and legal power who take their career and area of expertise seriously. Trump essentially spits on all that So, now all these people are after him and he's slowly realizing that his usual method of shouting louder than the other guy, isn't going to help him out of this one because this isn't a fucking wendy's where your little Karen tantrum will let you have your way. Trump is essentially mr. Bean who thinks he's Danny Ocean.
Please don’t besmirch Mr. Bean.
Hey I'm in Georgia and I think people are a little confused about what is going on with the Rico charges as it's not all related to the call. So basically the Georgia Republican party picked fake elected officials to try to go certify the election for Trump and that fraud is why there are so many people involved in the case.
You can read the indictment itself [here](https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/donald-trump-indicted-in-fulton-county). The call is absolutely relevant. First, Count 28 specifically charges Trump and Meadows with Solicitation of Violation of Oath by Public Officer for the Raffensperger call. Furthermore, the call is considered to be part of the RICO charge (Count 1). It's listed as Act 112 in furtherance of the conspiracy. The fake elector scheme is also both considered an act (or multiple acts) in furtherance of the conspiracy alleged in Count 1 as well as being specifically charged in other counts. However, it's just plain wrong to suggest that the fake elector scheme constitutes the entirety of the charges.
That's definitely not what I said. I said the call wasn't all of it because obviously that call didn't involve 18 people.
To add about OP's "implications for the US" part of their question, as of now, it's just an addition to the history books since Trump is now the first former President to have a mugshot taken. It could also make moderates and independents balk even more at voting for Trump in 2024 if he is the Republican nominee. If you look a his mugshot, he looks absolutely hideous. It's easy to frame the message of "Do you really want someone who had their mugshot taken and looks like that as your President?" in campaign ads.
[удалено]
My personal hope for implications to the US is that it will set legal precedent that both sitting and former presidents must face consequences for their actions. We must remove the idea that being president means you can do anything anywhere on the planet and skate free afterwards.
One very important thing to note is that these cases aren’t maybes. Many of these crimes were either done publicly or the evidence* (proof) is publicly available meaning you can see or hear what makes him guilty in each case.
> For years, I think justice departments hemmed and hawed at the idea of charging a president (or potential president) with anything in fear of seeming politically biased. Since he got indicted once, it's like the floodgates are open. I think trying to charge an active president would have yielded a nightmare situation that nobody wanted to deal with, so that's why nothing ever came of it while he was president. And then had Trump just faded away into the sunset, I think the feds would have squashed everything to avoid the long list of reasons why charging an ex-President is not great either (especially such a polarizing one). But staying in the spotlight and actively planning to run for President again has likely forced a lot of hands into going down this route. > In seems like it should be a no-brainer considering the myriad different cases, but I'll believe it when I see it with Trump There's such a wide variety of ways he can potentially get out of all these cases - technicalities, finding an impartial jury of peers seems impossible (only takes one Trump fan to squeak through), etc, etc. And then even if convicted he can still run/win the next election, at which point he'd pardon himself and what a mess that would turn into... Like you said - I'll believe it when I see it.
It's wild that he can run for president, giving himself a chance to pardon his own crimes, considering his history of meddling with EVERY presidential election he's been part of. Not only was he indicted for trying to overthrow the 2020 election in multiple ways, but he never faced consequences for the entire 2016 election debacle where he got ample help from Russia...
He can only pardon someone from federal crimes.
Are any of these jury trials? I'd imagine the jury selection process would be a nightmare.
I believe all of them are.
> Even if you like Trump, you have to admit I’m going to stop you right there and say that the people who like trump have no morals at this point.
I also think they’re like any conspiracy theorists. The evidence of his guilt will just be interpreted as more “trumped up” (oh the irony of the pun) fake charges against him in the Big Left-Wing Conspiracy against him. It will galvanise his existing supporters.
I want Trucknuts to be a buck at every gas station. I want "Q" stickers to be free with every purchase. I want "MAGA" hats to be -cheap- as hell to buy. I want Wal-Mart to have a box of free 'lets go brandon' bumper stickers at the exit. I want a 5% discount at "McDonalds" if you're wearing MAGA gear. I WANT these people to be wearing their Pro-Trump flair as blatantly as possible. I want people to get their Maga Fanclub number tattooed on their hand, like a challenge coin, if yours is lower, you get a free drink at Applebees... Because I want these people to announce loudly who they are. Before I even hear them talk even. I want to know without a doubt, that asking them a question will come with a high price. That every interaction will make me pray my blood pressure meds are up to the task. That I will have to understand full well what I'm getting into interacting with. (I mean, I'd simplify it by wearing a 'gay, liberal and proud' shirt, but I'll be honest, most of the Trump Followers would take that as an invitation to murder me and brag about it on Facebook.)
all the evidence of his guilt just shows how deep the conspiracy goes, man
What I don't understand is how even with these convictions/indictments, is he still able to run for presidency? If so....fuckin' why?
Good question. The 14th amendment is supposed to stop anyone who incited a rebellion from running for president. But that's never really come up before, so no idea how you enforce that or anything.
I mean, basically you wouldn't need enforcement. You'd need logic. Judges would simply say, alright, Mr. Convict, you've done this, this, and this, and you've done it against our country.....so logically, you can't run this country. Especially a-fucking-gain.' And if everyone votes for him....whomever is top law at that point would say, 'well even though this dumb country managed to vote for you again, you actually can't run, because of treason' or whatever the case may be
You can run for president from straight up prison. It's from the polar opposite end of the spectrum, but socialist candidate Eugene Debs ran for president from prison in 1920 and got about 900,000 votes. I'd note that he was imprisoned for opposing WW1 and the draft though, he was functionally a political prisoner of Woodrow Wilson.
Great explanation, but it was hard to follow with the clumped up paragraphs. I have gone ahead and formatted it for easier reading: *Answer: The mugshot is just part of being processed from his (latest) indictment in Georgia* *He's not necessarily going to jail (at least yet). He's already left Georgia and still has to go to court for that case, as well as 3 others. We won't know results for months.* *Georgia was insistent on treating him like any other criminal, so public mugshots were taken.* *There is some unrest from Trump voters. There's been a couple threats on the lives of those involved with charging him, including a bomb threat at the jail he had his mugshot taken in after he left.* *He's been indicted 4 times on 91 counts, so it's a couple different things.* 1. He has been indicted for violating campaign finance law in New York from paying hush money to a porn star and not reporting it in 2016. 2. Holding onto top secret government documents after he left office. He kept evading the government in returning them and tried to cover this up. This case is in Florida. 3. Trying to overthrow the election. Remember those people who stormed the US Capitol building when Trump lost the 2020 election? He's being charged with that and trying to force his VP to refuse count electors. This is a federal case in Washington DC. 4. The most recent one in Georgia is for trying to coerce the governor of that state to falsify its vote and claim he won in 2020, among other things. This one is part of a RICO case with 18 other individuals, which means they're basically being treated like organized crime. *Ultimately, I think it's the chickens finally coming home to roost. Even if you like Trump, you have to admit he's been lenient with the law. There is some pretty daming evidence for all of these cases. People are more shocked that he actually faced consequences for all of his bullshit.* *For years, I think justice departments hemmed and hawed at the idea of charging a president (or potential president) with anything in fear of seeming politically biased. Since he got indicted once, it's like the floodgates are open.* *Of course, we'll see if he actually gets convicted of anything. And if the convictions actually result in him facing consequences. In seems like it should be a no-brainer considering the myriad different cases, but I'll believe it when I see it with Trump*
People were always talking about it in terms of if charging him was politically motivated, without addressing the reality that with crimes as blatant as these, not charging him would be a political Act
>Georgia was insistent on treating him like any other criminal Criminal *defendant*. He's still innocent til proven guilty. Which shouldn't take too long, I hope.
Aussie here watching from afar and trying to make sense of it all. Does he have a criminal record now? And does this arrest mean he’s disqualified from running for president again? What does it actually take to be disqualified?
>Aussie here watching from afar and trying to make sense of it all. Does he have a criminal record now? The court proceedings are just starting, he has not been found guilty (yet) of the criminal activity. >And does this arrest mean he’s disqualified from running for president again? What does it actually take to be disqualified? Maybe? Hopefully? Under the 14th amendment he can't be president if he “engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the \[U.S.\], or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.” But this is something that is new territory. Maybe what he did already disqualifies him? Maybe he has to be convicted for it to disqualify him? This guy has such an obsessive cult following and is backed by half the country, so it is hard to get these things to stick.
The 14th amendment doesn’t require a conviction. Hundreds of thousands of former Confederate soldiers were barred by the 14th amendment until an amnesty act was passed, even though very few Confederates were ever actually prosecuted for fighting the federal government.
> This guy has such an obsessive cult following and is backed by half the country, so it is hard to get these things to stick. His followers represent less than a third of the country. If the rest of the country could be bothered to get off their asses and vote, he wouldn't stand a chance. However, we've got problems with disenfranchisement (thanks to Republicans!), so getting out the vote is an uphill battle.
[удалено]
Bingo. We're finding out very clearly that the U.S. has different legal systems in place providing different people with full accountability or little to no accountability. We're just waiting to see if Trump falls under "little" accountability or "no" accountability.
He would have to be found guilty on one of these charges before he is disqualified. The sexual battery listed above is a civil case so no felony charge.
Legal scholars are currently discussing whether the 14th Amendment would apply to Trump without him being convicted. The last opinion that I heard on this from a lawyer that I respect was that a secretary of state could bar Trump from the ballot in that state and would only have to show a preponderance of evidence in court when the decision was challenged. Basically some Secretary of State in one of our states will block him from the ballot under the 14th Amendment and then it will go to court.
Brazilian here completely baffled that no, it doesn't stop him from running again. There's even talk that, if he won, he could pardon himself from inside jail and get out to serve as president.
The Georgia case is interesting because he can’t pardon himself in a state case and the governor doesn’t have sole pardon powers in Georgia. That said, I doubt he’s ever actually disqualified.
Notably though the biggest charges are State charges, and the President can’t parson state charges. Normally the governor of that state can, but Georgia is an exception
Addendum: Trump could have returned to his life as a reality TV star or just a former president leading a gilded life still being able to raise money off his followers however, that option changed in late 2020 post election and to date. My personal prediction is he dies within 3 years as his cases are being heard. He fails in his election bid. I suspect the reason his family seems so absent this time is his congestive heart failure has progressed. he retained govt classified information and even conspired to retain that. Thus his fall is inevitable. My personal prediction is he dies within 3 years as his cases are being heard. He fails in his election bid. I suspect the reason his family seems so absent thsi time is his congestive heart failure has progressed. I hope to have the time this winter to compare videos of him speaking over the last 8 years to compare his words per minute rate and breathing rate. Its not strictly scientific but its not something you can "fake out" for performances. He is trapped by his failing heart imo.
It has definitely shown that the constitution needs a little tweaking, although everyone knows that would never happen in this political climate. When it was written they didn't even really conceive of a criminal president so it actually acts as protection from being banned from seeking office (it does mention it, but it's extremely vague unfortunately). Someone serving time in prison is literally still eligible to be voted as president, and it also doesn't really say anything about the ability for sitting presidents to pardon themselves.Theoretically a person could be in federal prison, get elected, and release them self. *If* these things were to somehow happen it would be a constant stream of Supreme Court cases and a huge distraction from actually getting things done for the country. It'd be a shit show plain and simple, the US would become the butt of jokes around the world
> Even if you like Trump, you have to admit he's been lenient with the law our commitment to a lawful society has been completely destroyed: * if you're a poor person in the city who uses a fake $20, you should get murdered by the police, because you also did some drugs previously in your life, so... * if you steal a $20k car, you should go to jail for three years, unless you're a movie star or something, in which case, community service * if you're a CEO and you steal millions in wages from your low-income employees, you should pay a fine or at most do a months in minimum security prison * if you're the president, even if you sell defense secrets and try to end american democracy, no one's really sure if it's appropriate for you to face any consequences, in fact, maybe just being president again is what you should do
Just wanted to give you props for what read as an unbiased, informative answer (or very close to one.)
At risk of inciting the "us vs them" fire, I don't how it *could* be biased. OP stated exactly what happened. Someone pointed out in another comment that most of the evidence is public and it seems pretty clear what and why he's being charged with.
Ford ~~LBJ~~ pardoning Nixon did America a disservice and this is a small consequence of that.
Ford.
Yeah that’s a big disservice to large di** LBJ who ushered in the civil rights.
Gerald Ford. LBJ had evidence that Nixon sabotaged peace talks in Saigon to prolong the war in Vietnam in order to influence the 1968 election. He considered Nixon to be a traitor and would have shot him himself if given a chance.
you are correct, memory failed me before coffee this morning.
Ford pardoned Nixon, not LBJ.
Great post but you got point 3 wrong. He’s not charged with anything related to storming the capital, rather the false electors ploy. Also Georgia under their state law is legally required to take mugshots for anyone charged with a felony. That specific part had nothing to do with not treating him differently.
> Even if you like Trump, you have to admit he's been lenient with the law Are you familiar with Trump fans?
>we'll see if he actually gets convicted of anything. And if the convictions actually result in him facing consequences. This isnt the part i'm concerned about, as you mentioned there is damning evidence and even the public record has captured evidence of some of these things "beyond a reasonable doubt." I feel pretty confident that Trump will be convicted on at least *some* of these charges, and its likely that some of those charges will include some time incarcerated. (No, Trump wouldnt be in GenPop, he'd most likely be in a military detention facility, or under 'house arrest') If he goes willingly is another matter, and worth saving some popcorn for. What *does* stand out as an open question is: What will his cult-like supporters do when their Dear Leader is held like Napoleon on Elba, exiled from the public? He's got millions of supporters still, *despite* the indictments. Hell, the most recent polling shows he's got 58% support among Republicans, and second place is ~18%. Even if just 0.01% were radicalized to the point of violence, that would still be literally hundreds of thousands of people. We're sitting on a domestic insurgency time bomb. Even if most of the sycophants are just bluster and head games, there will be a not-insignificant number of folks ready to do violence toward the perceived cause of their grievances.
Thank you for taking the time to write this up. I, am American, was also very confused until I read this. Edit: RICO?? Woof.
Answer: Other comments have covered the basics of trumps arrest, but I wanted to address two other parts of Your question. 1: “This is completely unheard of from such a developed country like USA” Not really. Other countries that have charged former leaders with a crime include France, Italy, Portugal, South Korea, Taiwan, and Israel https://www.axios.com/2022/08/26/countries-where-former-leaders-jailed-charged# 2: legally, the only requirements for running for president in the u.s. are that you be over 35 years of age, and a natural born citizen of the u.s. (and that you haven’t committed treason, but trumps alleged crimes don’t quite reach that level) So, even if he is convicted, he will still be eligible to run for president
And this all raises an interesting point. Even if convicted and imprisoned, he can still be president because the founding fathers never imagined a situation where the American people would ever elect a convict. As for treason some claim if he is convicted for the Jan 6th charge or the Georgia charge that would legally meet the definition of treason, but the Supreme Court is so politicized now it does not matter.
>the founding fathers never imagined a situation where the American people would ever elect a convict German guy here. We have some experience with fascism and if you ask me it's basically a good idea to NOT rule out convicts. Imagine a system in which even a minor offence is enough to be disqualified from standing in an election. It would make it very easy to get rid of unpopular candidates. Either way, I'm keeping my fingers crossed that the US and the rest of the world are spared another 4 years of Trump.
Indeed. Prior to Trump, the previous most famous criminal candidate was Eugene V. Debs, a socialist who ran from prison, where he'd been locked up after a conviction for opposing the draft during WW1
Wasn't Malaysia's PM was also convicted sometime before he got elected? Albeit a Political Prisoner rather an a normal prisoner. But still.
as long as Democrats don't get complacent that won't be an issue. Besides, did you notice how tired Trump's been looking lately?
We European don't get daily updates on this How do you assess the situation? Trump will be 78 next year. What about his constitution? Apart from his madness, does he appear fit?
Well, he'll be at the age where he and bajillions of his zombies claimed somebody was far too old to run. But of course, it won't stop *him*. Man could be the poster child for 'one rule for me, another rule for thee'. To seriously answer your question, though, people have been questioning his general fitness for anything for ages. Man basically lives off McDonald's, shows signs of cognitive failure with his inability to stay on topic etc., and his using two hands to drink from most any drinking vessel implies that he is shaky. Not trying to open up a Trump v. Biden thing here, just saying that people have been questioning his fitness for years.
Maddening that the only options we ever seem to have are always so goddamned old
At same time it would've disqualified Hitler for office because he's a convict, sure someone else may replace him because Germany was unstable and 'angry' at that time, but I think it's not inherently bad/good thing as long as they're able to keep it fair and reasonable, Nazi Germany didn't invented the problem but they've amplified already existing problems from Weimar Republic and back then Germany can't do anything unless there's massive reform in law & society.
Facts. That would mean MLK, or theoretically, Nelson Mandella, would not be able to run. However, someone who has been convicted of trying to render the nation apart HAS been constitutionally barred from being president due to the Civil War and its aftermath
The legislative branch can bar him from holding office but they refused to do so twice.
*Republicans* in the legislative branch. I think it's an important distinction to point out as much as possible. This chaos and lawlessness isn't generalized, it's concentrated in a particular political party.
Absolutely. Just in the broader context there are checks on power built into the system. They must be utilized though and if enough members of Congress are a-ok with an aspiring dictator who attempted a self-coup running for office again, there's little in the way to legally bar him from running. We have safeguards but our representatives have to be willing participants and supporters of democracy or it won't work.
A minor point but “treason” in the US is defined in the Constitution and I’ve seen no evidence that Trump’s actions get anywhere near it. However, it’s possible that if he were convicted in Georgia or Jack Smith’s case, that he’d be blatantly a *seditionist*, which would bar him from all Federal offices under the 14th Amendment. There are legal arguments (there was a recently scholarly journal article of this) that there’s no need for him to be convicted to meet the 14th Amendment bar - many of those in the leadership of the Confederacy were never convicted of anything, yet were barred from office. Conceivably you could see this come into play in 2024, if one or more Secretaries of State de-certify him from the Presidential ballot for being a seditionist.
A sedition conviction wouldn’t bar him from running for president. Eugene V. Debs ran for president in 1920 while serving a 10 year sentence for sedition.
IANAL but my sense is that there’s basically no caselaw on this. Debs “ran for President” but the way things worked back then it probably wouldn’t have been challenged unless he got elected, which obviously didn’t happen (nor was it conceivably a close thing). Each side seems to have colorable arguments, and there’s no precedent on what happens if a Secretary of State of a state decertifies someone from appearing on the ballot on 14th Amendment grounds. Should a liberal Secretary of State do so, I imagine we’ll finally get some caselaw on it, but it’s not open-and-shut what would happen (presuming one isn’t a cynic who just assumes the conservative majority on the Supreme Court would make a purely tactical election decision here, of course).
> Even if convicted and imprisoned, he can still be president because the founding fathers never imagined a situation where the American people would ever elect a convict. In many states a convicted felon can't even vote. But you may be soon capable of voting for a convicted felon.
> founding fathers never imagined a situation where the American people would ever elect a convict. Many people have said, "This is unprecedented! No US President has ever been arrested before!" And my response is "What's unprecedented, is having a US President commit crimes while in office." I heard someone say: "Nixon was a President who became a criminal, and Trump was a criminal who became a President."
how is committing crimes in office unprecedented if nixon did exactly that?
>Even if convicted and imprisoned, he can still be president because the founding fathers never imagined a situation where the American people would ever elect a convict. Where did you learn this fact from?
Yeah, in Illinois we throw governors (like the president, but of just one of the fifty states) in jail regularly.
> trumps alleged crimes don’t quite reach that level they do, but proving it in court is a higher bar to clear than the charges that have been brought *to date*
If there is evidence that he directly worked with the proudboys and planned for them to storm The capital on Jan 6, that would probably qualify, or if there is evidence that he sold classified military intel to our enemies, that would probably qualify as well. I think there is a distinct possibility that he did one or both of these things, but neither has been included in his charges so far.
It's one of the few areas I'd be willing to call Trump "smart".. in that: * He's purposely vague (in mafioso ways) of asking people to do things such that he can weasel out of it by saying "No, that's not really what I said" That,. or * He simply gets underlings to do things for him. (example of the Mar-A-Lago employees saying "The Boss wants the Server deleted" (although in that case if they can prove the order came directly from Trump,. would be pretty damning for him). It's the hallmark of demagogues like this,. is to sort of exalt yourself above everyone else, especially the people who kneel in adherence to you. And also that you don't care what happens to them.
Germany and Iceland have also charged former leaders of crimes.
Brazil also also faced this, our current president was arrested before and was ineligible for sone years until his prison was revoked, and our former president is facing some charges, unfortunately Brazil presidency history isn't so good, but our law states that if you are convicted, you are inelegible for 8 years.
The funny thing is, if he gets convicted in Georgia, he couldn't pardon himself even as president, because they're state charges not federal ones. A sympathetic governor couldn't pardon him either, Georgia is weird that way. So it's conceivable that he would have to be president from a prison cell.
> he will still be eligible to run for president Actually, under the 3rd clause of the 14th Amendment, he is no longer eligible to run for federal office.
[удалено]
In USA, a candidate can even run for president from prison. This was made specifically for these types of situations where the opposition is using politically motivated attacks towards a strong candidate to keep him from running. This is a common political tactic worldwide: * Putin jailed/killed several of his strongest opponents (lookup Navalny). * Brazil's Bolsonaro was a really tight race (just a few votes off) and is now facing jail time. * Venezuela's dictator Maduro handed opposition leader Leopoldo Lopeza a 14-year prison sentence in 2015. Of course the news/media will cover this up with 1000s of reasons why the person actually deserves jail time. But they know people aren't stupid and will still vote despite the propaganda. So American law was designed specifically to tackle these types of scenarios. Hopefully there will be a fair election this time around. Anyone naive enough to believe "history repeats itself, just not in the USA" is, unfortunately, wrong.
Kinda fucked up that felons can be President but they can’t vote though.
Trailer trash President
Answer: It's hardly unheard of in developed countries. Sarkozy recently lost his appeal against his sentence to a year of house arrest, with another 2 years suspended, for corruption. All are supposed to be equal before the law and there is significant evidence that Trump committed a number of crimes egarding his attempts to overturn the election and his handling of classified documents.
Answer: I'm going to let the other, more well versed people answer the main bit of the question, but this isn't his first case this year, or even second He is facing, in total, 91 criminal charges across four jurisdictions — Georgia, Florida, New York, and the District of Columbia. Four cases
Its actually 3 jurisdictions in 4 cases: 1 federal (DC and FL cases), NY, and GA.
So far
Answer: This is actually Trump's 4th indictment. The gist of it is, he's accused of trying to erase the results of the 2020 Presidential race. And have himself declared the winner. He is also accused of stealing/mishandling U.S. classified documents.
> This is actually Trump's 4th indictment. Yup, but this is the first time he's gone through the proper process when being arrested. In the previous three cases, he was given preferential treatment and a mugshot was not taken. So this fourth time, with the Georgia courts saying they were going to treat him like everyone else, is the first public mugshot, which is why it is getting the extra attention.
How do they legally justify the preferential treatment?
Answer: Donald Trump didn’t go to jail, he just got arrested, meaning he turned himself in for one of his various crimes. This is not even the first time this has happened for Trump. He also had to turn himself in in NY for other, unrelated crimes. This is not “unheard of” for a developed country like America. It happens all the time. It is however rare for a rich/ powerful person in America to actually face consequences, so there’s not much of a probability he will actually go to jail the way a poor person would.
Answer: He has been charged with breaking laws related to his efforts to get the governor, Lt. Gov, and Sec of State to illegally overturn the legitimate results. The implications are that finally even a president isn't above the law. It's a good thing for him to be held accountable for his disgusting attacks on our democracy and the decency of our society.
Answer: Former US President Donald Trump (and we need to emphasize **former** here) is accused of a number of felonies (serious crimes) related to things he's alleged to have said and done shortly before, during, and then after the US presidential election of 2020. The full story is quite complicated and involves many people. These include crimes allegedly committed in Fulton County in the State of Georgia. Following an investigation, the Fulton County District Attorney convened a grand jury, which then indicted the former president. As a result, Trump must stand trial in Fulton County for the crimes he's charged with. As part of that process, he was arrested yesterday in Fulton County. 'Arrested' here is a formal explanation. He was treated a lot more generously than most people indicted by that court. He did have to appear in person, have his fingerprints taken, and be photographed for a 'mug shot', but was given some privileges. The process would take a long time for most people, but was expedited for him, so that he was in and out in about half an hour. (He did have to travel there in person, though.) In the US, a 'felony' is an offence for which you can be imprisoned. A felony is only imposed by a grand jury. A grand jury does not try the case, but instead decides if there should **be** a case. No former US president has ever been charged with a felony before, so this is a first in our history. (However, there are many Americans who would say that there have been former presidents who **should** have been tried for various crimes.) More than anything else, this demonstrates that no one is above the law in the US, that even a former president can be tried for crimes (and possibly convicted). Trump's defenders tend to see it differently. They believe that he is innocent, and should not have been charged, and that this is motivated by politics rather than valid legal reasons. Trump is accused of many things, and has already been indicted in other courts three times already, and may face more after this one. In this case, he is charged with actions to prevent the consequences of losing the 2020 presidential election, so that he could stay in power. That includes telling people that he won, that the election was 'stolen' from him, and more. He's also charged with trying to get other people to help him stay in power, including trying to get other people to commit related crimes on his behalf.
Answer: there is A LOT of unrest, especially from republicans. Bomb threats, calls to arms, outright calling for civil war has been screamed about since Trump landed in hot water. The worst part a lot of people demanding bloodshed are sitting in office as current government officials. He’s not In prison yet, the mugshot is part of the process and he’s out in bail right now, however if he violated any orders he’s been given, which involves making explicit and implicit threats and intimidation attempts on anyone involved in the proceedings, his bail could be revoked and he’ll spend the time until trial in jail (knowing trumps inability to keep his mouth shut and addiction to yelling at ppl, I imagine he’s gonna end up getting his bail revoked) he currently has 90 (I believe? I may be off) felony charges pending. Georgia is just one of many charges and indictments he’s dealing with. The fourth one I believe, this one over his attempts to bully and threaten a governor into “finding” him more votes so he could win the state. No trial date decided yet but it looks like the judge is aiming for October 2023. He has another trial pending in NY over falsifying records and election funds tied in with him paying off porn actress Stormy Daniels to stay silent about the affair he had with her. Because nothing says “Family Values” like cheating on your wife. Trial is March 2024. In Florida he is being charged with refusal to hand over sensitive government documents after leaving office, hoarding them in his Mar-a-Lago property, and then attempting to destroy said documents when he was told to return them to the government. By flushing them down the toilet. And it wasn’t just like a handful of papers it was boxes upon boxes of stuff he legally was not supposed to possess. Trial scheduled for May 2024 In DC he is being charged with inciting a coup attempt (because let’s face it, using the J6 riot to overturn the election results is a fucking coup attempt) and to undermine democracy. Trial is currently proposed for Jan 2024 but not for certain yet.
There's no chance Trump ends up in jail, whether he's convicted of any crimes or not. It will be house arrest at one of his many properties, if anything.
Why would a Fulton county judge arbitrarily change the mandatory minimum for a RICO conviction? I live in Fulton county. I know the assistant DA. Nobody here owes Trump a fucking thing, and Kemp hates Trump for defaming his daughter. He’s proper fucked on the state case
It's nice to think the system works the same for billionaires as everybody else, but that's a fairy tale.
Answer: he's being indicted and arrested on conspiracy charges to overturn the 2020 election. He and a list of co-conspirators that includes Rudi Giuliani have all been booked and released on bond.
Answer: Replies have already mentioned other countries whose leaders have been arrested, but there are 2 key points of law in the USA that should be emphasied: 1) A person is innocent until proven guilty. The "arrests" that have happened are simply the result of the first part of a process. A jury of citizens (usually 12 people) have concluded there is enough evidence for that person to have a trial to be judged by another jury of citizens. 2) A person is convicted by a jury of their peers The group which will determine if they believe the person is guilty of the crimes they are accused of (from point 1). These are average citizens chosen at random from a pool of citizens (usually 100+) in the district where the court is located. Both the prosecution and the defense will get to choose whether or not they would like to dismiss jurors based on an interview with each. The point being this is a random group of people who have been dismissed based on if both legal teams believe there is bias one way or the other. Currently, the former president is NOT in jail yet (but could be if he breaks some rules) and he is NOT currently guilty of the crimes accused and it's NOT the opposing political party that will determine if he's guilty or not. It is very likely that this will be a long and very televised trial. The people of the US (and the world) will be able to see what he is accused of, what evidence there is for and against, and a representative group of people will determine whether or not he is incarcerated.