Probably not, maybe house arrest? I'm curious to see if this has an effect on the other cases, if any. Can Jack Smith easily add a 2016 election interference count now that this is proven?
this post was submitted on 30 May 2024
338 points (98.3% liked)
politics
18852 readers
4205 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Why can a felon run for president?
Because when voters feel the punishment was unjust, they can choose to ignore it. For example: Nelson Mandela.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Because if they couldn't, elected officials would just have their opponents brought up on weak technical charges just to get them disqualfied.
"Sir, you have been found guilty of jaywalking. As this is the third time you've been charged with this crime, that bumps it up to a felony under the ijustmadethisup act of 1793. The fine will be $50+ court costs. I also have to let you know that because you are a convicted felon, you are no longer allowed to run for office and have been removed from the ballot. Have a nice day."
Not quite that silly, but you get the idea.
Maybe draw the line at idk, 30 felonies? That should cover any political bs.
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(7 replies)
If felons can't vote (they should be able to), they sure as shit shouldn't be able to run for office.
If it makes you feel better, he can't vote for himself.
Can he look over Melanie's shoulder while she votes for him like last time?
He is a Floridian though, doesn't it take a "simple" meeting with DeSantis's hand picked committee to get his voting rights back?
load more comments
(3 replies)
This does make me feel better. Thank you.
load more comments
(1 replies)
So, let's say a political party is somehow at fault for charging and getting a verdict of an opponent. This would make it very easy to block anyone from running against the party in power if they so choose.
The founding fathers saw how much of an issue this would be so limited the reasons for blocking someone from running for office. I don't think hush money is a good reason (though, doing so to block info that would make him lose an election I think should be but that will be up to the court)
Isn't there a bigger problem than who can run for president at that point?
load more comments
(4 replies)
Let’s see how endlessly antagonizing the sentencing judge works out for him.
Once again, Betteridge's law applies perfectly.
They had to fucking ask didn't they!?!
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Two experts told NBC News that it's unlikely Trump will be imprisoned based on his age, lack of a criminal record and other factors — and an analysis of thousands of cases found that very few people charged with the same crime receive jail time.
During the trial, Judge Juan Merchan threatened to put Trump behind bars for violating his gag order, but it’s unclear if the former president will face similar consequences now.
Former federal prosecutor Chuck Rosenberg, an NBC News analyst, said it's unlikely that Merchan would sentence Trump, 77, to any jail time, given his age and his status as a first-time, nonviolent offender.
An analysis conducted by Norm Eisen, who worked for House Democrats during Trump’s first impeachment, found that roughly one in 10 people who have been convicted of falsifying business records are imprisoned, and those cases typically involved other crimes.
Kuby added that he believes "it is substantially likely Judge Merchan will sentence Trump to jail or prison time," despite the logistical and practical complications that locking up a person with Secret Service protection would entail.
It's also highly unlikely that comments that appeared to be aimed at sidestepping the gag order by Republican officials who attended the trial as Trump's guests will figure into the judge's reasoning, Kuby added.
The original article contains 842 words, the summary contains 216 words. Saved 74%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
34 counts... If they don't sentence him, then what's the fucking point!? Anything less than jail time is just going to empower him. Lock his ass up!
Agreed, that post made it seem like he was innocent up until now. The e jean carrol conviction should relieve him of his first timer status
That was a civil suit, not criminal.
Amen, it should also relieve him of his non-violent offender status. The man was found guilty of rape. The only reason he didn't serve jail time for that was because it was past the statute of limitations.
I can commit all the election finance fraud I want in the 2024 election and not have to deal with it until 2032 if I'm caught!