Trump's Post Election Fallout: Legal & Obstruction actions

[RedDenver]

I have to say it's looking more likely Trump had nuclear secrets. (Also, Trump's claim that Obama took documents has already been debunked.)

 

[Decoy73]

21 minutes ago, ZRod said:

Unless he really did declassify this stuff (extremely doubtful) homeboy is a conviction away (and it would be an open and shut case) from never being able to hold federal office again.

Apparently it’s not that clear cut.  Towards the end of the article:
https://www.npr.org/2022/08/10/1116802732/making-sense-of-trumps-current-legal-troubles

 

KELLY: You just teed up my next question. Any of this effectively able to stop him from launching another White House bid?

MCQUADE: I don't think so. You know, there's been some talk this week that one of the charges, 18 U.S.C. Section 2071, has a provision in it for someone who wrongfully retains government documents shall be disqualified from serving in future federal office. But I can't imagine that that would pass constitutional muster when it comes to the president. That office, the qualifications are defined by the Constitution. I don't think you can use a statute to supersede that. So I don't think so. I think we could have this very unusual situation where someone could be charged and simultaneously running for president.

[RedDenver]

 

[ZRod]

22 minutes ago, Decoy73 said:

Apparently it’s not that clear cut.  Towards the end of the article:
https://www.npr.org/2022/08/10/1116802732/making-sense-of-trumps-current-legal-troubles

 

KELLY: You just teed up my next question. Any of this effectively able to stop him from launching another White House bid?

MCQUADE: I don't think so. You know, there's been some talk this week that one of the charges, 18 U.S.C. Section 2071, has a provision in it for someone who wrongfully retains government documents shall be disqualified from serving in future federal office. But I can't imagine that that would pass constitutional muster when it comes to the president. That office, the qualifications are defined by the Constitution. I don't think you can use a statute to supersede that. So I don't think so. I think we could have this very unusual situation where someone could be charged and simultaneously running for president.

But the criminal code is inacted by Congress, who also created the rules for being president. I'm sure there would be a Supreme Court ruling but the law is pretty clear, and I'm pretty sure a Felon couldn't be president.

[BigRedBuster]

I’ve been thinking about this. 
 

 

Trump is his late 70s. He’s setting up for if he falls over dead. 

[RedDenver]

4 minutes ago, ZRod said:

But the criminal code is inacted by Congress, who also created the rules for being president. I'm sure there would be a Supreme Court ruling but the law is pretty clear, and I'm pretty sure a Felon couldn't be president.

I believe the rules for being President are in the Constitution, not created by Congress.

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artII-S1-C5-1/ALDE_00001124/

[knapplc]

It shows how broken the Republican party is that we're legit considering whether they would elect someone convicted of a felony.

[BigRedBuster]

 

[Moiraine]

6 minutes ago, knapplc said:

It shows how broken the Republican party is that we're legit considering whether they would elect someone convicted of a felony.

 

 

There is a 0.000000001% chance Trump loses the GOP primary if he runs, even if he’s a convicted felon. 

[BigRedBuster]

14 minutes ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

There is a 0.000000001% chance Trump loses the GOP primary if he runs, even if he’s a convicted felon. 

Agree. 

[Dr. Strangelove]

21 minutes ago, knapplc said:

It shows how broken the Republican party is that we're legit considering whether they would elect someone convicted of a felony.

I'm of the unpopular opinion, at least for a liberal person, that he should be allowed to run and possibly win.

[nic]

Interesting. They grabbed top secret docs. Didn’t Trump or someone say the FBI got nothing? Then it was that they were all declassified. I guess at first they were planted.  I can't for the life of me figure out why some would knowingly take top secret docs unless is was malicious or some weird belief that he was above the law and he wanted to retain the info in those docs. 

 

I am very curious to know  what the docs were, but that likely will not happen. The other thing is that it's hard to get a hold of these docs. They are not just lying around the oval office. They get signed out and tracked. You can't just hold on to them indefinitely because they would not be secure. 

 

I would say that Trump went all in and lost his hand. If convicted he cannot run for Pres I believe. Good news for the Republicans.

[ZRod]

52 minutes ago, RedDenver said:

I believe the rules for being President are in the Constitution, not created by Congress.

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artII-S1-C5-1/ALDE_00001124/

Yes, you're right but Congress and the Senate are also responsible for impeachment and removal as well as counting the electoral college votes so they do have some authority over the position. Obviously I'm not a lawyer nor do I play one on TV, but just blabbering away.

[ZRod]

56 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

 

Our institutions are "welded"? No wonder they're so strong!

[Archy1221]

All this is actually a win/win in my view as there are only 2 scenarios to play out.

 

1). This turns out to be a nothing burger and the Biden DOJ is shown to head hunting a political opponent.   Or

 

2). Trump took the documents in question and is convicted of a felony, can’t run for office and DeSantis mops the floor with any of the Dem candidates.   
 

Either is fine by me.