Trump Trials - Mega-Thread

[Leo Gura]

There's gonna be a year's worth of Trump trial news, so let's consolidate it all here.

[Leo Gura]

Georgia election interference trial date set for March:

This is amazing news. If the date holds he should be convicted before the election.

Edited August 28, 2023 by Leo Gura

[Hardkill]

There have actually been a few top legal experts who have been saying that according to the 14 amendment, section 3 Trump should already be constitutionally be barred from running for office again:

 

[Leo Gura]

@Hardkill Yeah, I've seen that. But I don't think it is enforceable, realistically.

Edited August 28, 2023 by Leo Gura

[Buck Edwards]

But....he is running. 

[Hardkill]

5 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

@Hardkill Yeah, I've seen that. But I don't think it is enforceable, realistically.

Is that because the conservative federal courts, including SCOTUS, will probably not rule in favor of it even if Trump got convicted?

Edited August 28, 2023 by Hardkill

[Leo Gura]

3 minutes ago, Hardkill said:

Is that because the conservative federal courts, including SCOTUS, will probably not rule in favor of it even if Trump got convicted?

There's just no mechanism to enforce it. It would have to go to the Supreme Court.

[Buck Edwards]

The real solution to a problem is uprooting the mentality. Trump is the mouthpiece for it. 

 

[Hardkill]

8 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

There's just no mechanism to enforce it. It would have to go to the Supreme Court.

and you don't believe that even some of the conservatives on the Supreme Court including Roberts, Kavanaugh, Barrett, and Gorsuch wouldn't agree with the argument that Trump should be barred from office as he did "engaged in insurrection or rebellion against" the United States, or had "given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof"?
 

If that won't work then why have even two of the legal experts from the far-right Federalist Society been the ones who came up with this idea? Why do they say that even according to a conservative and originalist interpretation of that part of the constitution that Trump has undoubtedly disqualified himself from being able to run again?

Edited August 28, 2023 by Hardkill

[Buck Edwards]

And he will milk it. 

[Leo Gura]

6 minutes ago, Hardkill said:

and you don't believe that even some of the conservatives on the Supreme Court including Roberts, Kavanaugh, Barrett, and Gorsuch wouldn't agree with the argument that Trump should be barred from office as he did "engaged in insurrection or rebellion against" the United States, or had "given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof"?

I would not trust those judges to moderate this forum fairly.

Edited August 28, 2023 by Leo Gura

[Buck Edwards]

Some of the judges are like Trump aides. 

[Hardkill]

9 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

I would not trust those judges to moderate this forum fairly.

But they did do the right thing before by denying to hear Trump's election challenging cases. They also struck down the 3rd and last challenge to Obamacare in 2021 by a 7 to 2 ruling, even when the court had 6 conservatives and 3 liberals on the court. They further struck down 1 or 2 months ago, the frightening Moore vs. Harper case, which argued that state legislatures have unlimited power in determining any kind of elections.

Maybe Chief Justice Roberts, who is the most moderate and reasonable of the conservative justices on the court could try to convince 1 or 2 conservatives on the court to rule in favor of disbarring Trump according to the constitution. 

Perhaps this is still just wishful thinking.

[Hardkill]

If Trump gets convicted before the 2024 election then would the RNC or the Republican establishment decide to bar him from being the Republican nominee for president? Or will the majority Republican primary voters finally come to the conclusion that they have to move on from Trump to DeSantis?

[Buck Edwards]

1 minute ago, Hardkill said:

If Trump gets convicted before the 2024 election then would the RNC or the Republican establishment decide to bar him from being the Republican nominee for president? Or will the majority Republican primary voters finally come to the conclusion that they have to move on from Trump to DeSantis?

What do we got - 

Someone like Trump. Ok Trump nevermind. 

Someone like DeSantis. 

Someone like Tucker Carlson. 

.... At this point (insert meme).

[Hardkill]

49 minutes ago, Buck Edwards said:

What do we got - 

Someone like Trump. Ok Trump nevermind. 

Someone like DeSantis. 

Someone like Tucker Carlson. 

.... At this point (insert meme).

Vivek Ramaswamy or Mike Pence. lol

How about Chris Christie? I actually respect him for totally calling out Trump hard.

[Buck Edwards]

Just now, Hardkill said:

Vivek Ramaswamy or Mike Pence. lol

How about Chris Christie? I actually respect him for totally calling out Trump hard.

All 3 choices are bad. The first one is a gimmick. He looks like a guy who will break under pressure. Pence, we already know. Chris Christie is like a pastor. Running only to have free lunches, dinners, hotels, drinks, security, and the usual trappings of a candidate who haven't a chance. On defeat, he will push a book, hit the tv and find his next grift.

 

[Hatfort]

I've heard they could prevent him from running for the crime of sedition, according to the Constitution. He clearly attempted to steal the election, the perfect phone call has been out for months. He asked an official to find him 11.780 votes, the number he needed to surpass Biden in Georgia. Votes are not sought and found, they are cast and counted. Guilty.

However, I want him to run, I hope they don't prevent it.

[Gidiot]

I know we all want Dems to win and think Trump would be better to run against, but truly it would be better for the country if that man had to answer for his devilry, I dont like Desantis at all but I believe Trump shouldnt be allowed to run either, any sane person would agree, hes a danger to this country staying together and has called for civil war many times for absolutely bullshit reasons.

[ryandesreu]

@VictorB02 not sure what you're referring to exactly.