RE: The Official "Damned Trump" Thread
January 26, 2021 at 6:08 pm
(This post was last modified: January 26, 2021 at 6:09 pm by Brian37.)
(January 26, 2021 at 5:23 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:(January 26, 2021 at 5:16 pm)Brian37 Wrote: That is my point. But when you read the "DOJ" recommendation, "you can't indict a sitting President". They were talking about criminal indictment which could land a a no name on trial and criminally responsible.
There is no way Trump is not criminally responsible for what he incited. The KKK back in the 70s and 80s had leaders not only civilly liable financially, but members and leaders were held criminally liable too.
The point of convicting him in the Senate is about sending a message to any politician, of any party that you cant let people in position of power get away with what is clearly what would be a slam dunk if a no name did the same.
Right, you can’t indict a sitting president, but that’s not what you asked earlier.
It’s moot - Trump is no longer a sitting president (which is why John Roberts isn’t presiding at the upcoming trial) and can be indicted for whatever a grand jury decides to indict him for.
Boru
Again, the DOJ wording was never part of the Constitution, it wasn't even a congressional law, it was merely a "recommendation".
I don't think we are in disagreement then. I was asking if Trump can be indicted and tried in a criminal trial. My take is yes. That is different than will he be convicted.
It is sad though from my perspective, that it would make it far easier to indict in a criminal trial outside the Senate if the GOP was willing to do the right thing.
Roberts isn't which is fucked up, and makes him a coward as far as I am concerned, but dumping it into the hands of a Democrat in congress to preside. The idea of a trial in senate is not to have a member of congress as judge, but an actual judge. Senator Pat Leahy isn't a sitting judge. Basically Roberts used a bullshit procedural move to put Pat in the position of making the entire event look political.