Trump

[KlaxonCow]

And, of course, the grand problem is that if he gets elected as President, then he has the power to pardon himself.

That's the bit that I don't get. They had 4 years to push for these prosecutions.

Why have they taken this long, that the only one that'll happen before the election is this one? Which, yes, is the most limp-wristed of the charges put forward.

Pushed a year earlier, say, and he'd already be in jail, with a long list of convictions against him. And the Republicans wouldn't have touched him with a barge pole to be their primary candidate.

And we wouldn't be here, and this possibility wouldn't be threatening us.

So why exactly did they fuck around for 4 years, and only really push hard on this when it was essentially too late for it to be useful?

[zip accident]

So why exactly did they fuck around for 4 years, and only really push hard on this when it was essentially too late for it to be useful?

Trump supporters used delaying tactics?

[ThetaReactor]

And, of course, the grand problem is that if he gets elected as President, then he has the power to pardon himself.

President can't pardon a state crime, only federal.

[tufty]

And, of course, the grand problem is that if he gets elected as President, then he has the power to pardon himself.

President can't pardon a state crime, only federal.

Yeah, but if he has the right to use Seal Team 6 to take out any opposition, who's going to try and oppose him, let alone do anything about state laws?

[F-ZeroOne]

Judge Cannon, who is overseeing one of his legal entanglements is generally regarded as being - at best - a bit in over their head and at worst knowing which Trump they're buttered on. The Supreme Court is also just a teensy bit Trump weighted and is also essentially delaying decisions until its too late either way.

[Kelloggs]

That's the bit that I don't get. They had 4 years to push for these prosecutions.

A standing tradition within the US DoJ, apparently (I think someone wrote a memo at some point), is that one does not simply indict a sitting President. So, whatever could be in place prior to November 2020 had to not look like legal action - essentially, they had to wait for him to be voted out first. Also, important court cases in the US can take years to come about, and the criminal prosecution of a former President is, to pull a near-pun, unprecedented in its import. There ain't no rules for this, because there's nothing in the Constitution about it, because how the hell could we have a criminal President?

Also, as a more concrete example (albeit one I've just thought up, and I'm not a US law practitioner) - while he was still President he wasn't illegally holding on to classified documents. That literally could not have occurred, let alone be investigated or brought before a court, until after he was voted out.

[tufty]

Also, important court cases in the US can take years to come about

See SCO vs IBM.

[skab]

I am enjoying all the people, and I do not mean you lot here, acting like they won The Super Bowl, The World Cup, and The World Series all at once, when he was just basically convicted of one of the lowest felonies possible: paperwork fraud.

This wasn't about "hush money", this was about election interference (once again). Paying someone money so incriminating news don't get out and influence an election.

[Harlequin]

I am enjoying all the people, and I do not mean you lot here, acting like they won The Super Bowl, The World Cup, and The World Series all at once, when he was just basically convicted of one of the lowest felonies possible: paperwork fraud.

This wasn't about "hush money", this was about election interference (once again). Paying someone money so incriminating news don't get out and influence an election.

He was convicted of falsifying business records by declaring reimbursements for the payment as legal expenses to hide what was effectively an illegal campaign contribution. The payment for Daniels's silence and wider aspects of election influence were not, in themselves, the crimes.

[F-ZeroOne]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-u ... a-69091802

Hunter Biden found guilty of lying on a firearms application. Presumably greatest miscarriage of justice in the ENTIRE HISTORY OF HUMANITY by the utterly corrupt right-wing agenda Republican-led fraud criminal empire... oh, wait, that line only works the other way, right?

[PFVA]

I couldn't handle watching more than 10m of the debate yesterday.

One thing I don't understand.

Why don't people like Kamala Harris? I don't know much about her but the few times I saw her talking she seemed to know what she was saying.

[zip accident]

Why don't people like Kamala Harris? I don't know much about her but the few times I saw her talking she seemed to know what she was saying.

I don't remember hearing of her before today, unlike Mike Pence and several other VPs.

[Mat]

When Biden won, the narrative appeared to be that his vice president, Kamala, would take over and run in 2024, but I think she somehow managed to scupper herself in the time between then and now. I don't think there was any one particular incident, but support for her has certainly dropped off a cliff.

There's some reading from the Beeb early on here:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-60061473

And some from The Atlantic from last year here:
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/ar ... ge/675439/

Nothing really stands out, but her approval ratings have been low throughout her term.

The cynic in me tends to think it's the fact that she's a woman of colour, but I suspect there's more to it than just that.

[zip accident]

When Biden won, the narrative appeared to be that his vice president, Kamala, would take over and run in 2024, but I think she somehow managed to scupper herself in the time between then and now. I don't think there was any one particular incident, but support for her has certainly dropped off a cliff.

There's some reading from the Beeb early on here:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-60061473

And some from The Atlantic from last year here:
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/ar ... ge/675439/

Nothing really stands out, but her approval ratings have been low throughout her term.

The cynic in me tends to think it's the fact that she's a woman of colour, but I suspect there's more to it than just that.

for me, it's got very little to do with approval, I don't remember many VPs, JFK's was LBJ, LBJ's ? Nixon's was notoriously Agnew, and he wasn't approved of at all.

... taller than she is (about 5 foot 2).

That'll do it, voters like tall.

[noodles]

Looks like Trump is set to win this. Unbelievable. Can the Democrats really not find anyone else than Biden ?!?