|
10-01-2019 02:55 PM
#1
| |
| |
|
10-01-2019 05:09 PM
#2
| |
I think he meant if there's no impeachment, 2020 election runs its course, a D wins, then Trump gets the book thrown at him, that D #46 won't be pulllng out the pardon paddle. | |
|
10-01-2019 05:40 PM
#3
| |
I'd guess the odds of Trump finishing his term, then being prosecuted for his actions while POTUS after the fact are very slim. | |
| |
|
10-01-2019 05:53 PM
#4
| |
I agree. | |
|
10-01-2019 06:08 PM
#5
| |
Most of what I was hearing at the time was "stick it to the man," and "politics as usual has screwed us over." | |
| |
|
10-01-2019 06:34 PM
#6
| |
It's an awkward position for a Democrat 46, because a huge part of what's blatantly wrong with Trump is that he attempts to persecute his political rivals. It would be very hard for a Dem46 to convince aggrieved MAGA hatters that that's not what's happening. But actively pardoning isn't an option, and even directing his DOJ to look the other way doesn't seem politically permissible. | |
|
10-01-2019 06:22 PM
#7
| |
Well, a couple of things: | |
|
10-02-2019 01:12 PM
#8
| |
1) Yeah. Impeachment is equivalent to a Grand Jury. If the impeachment hearing reaches a supermajority of votes to impeach, that amounts to a criminal indictment. That is, the impeachment hearing is a precursor to leveling criminal charges and any legal actions that follow. The purpose is to see if there is adequate evidence to take the time and effort to press charges, basically. It's meant to protect elected officials from frivolous law suits, as I understand it. IF the impeachment goes through, then removal from office to stand trial is the next legal action. | |
| |
|
10-02-2019 08:30 PM
#9
| |
Yeah, the ex-POTUS impeachment is interesting but almost certainly will remain theoretical, and is a bit in the weeds. But if you're enjoying the rabbit hole, this is just a few paragraphs: https://slate.com/news-and-politics/...ton-again.html | |