https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/ ... 865330.pdf
US Presidential Election 2024
-
firlandsfarm
- Posts: 3491
- Joined: Sat May 03, 2014 8:20 am
OK, I appreciate the limited application of your comment but let's just assume he does receive a prison sentence if found guilty ... I heard this morning that is highly unlikely because a former President is entitled to full protection for life (On January 10, 2013, President Barack Obama signed the Former Presidents Protection Act of 2012, reinstating lifetime Secret Service protection for his predecessor George W. Bush, himself, and all subsequent presidents.) ... so would his Secret Service protection squad have to go to jail with him?!!
It would be a new test to the constitution. I doubt the 2012 Act made provisions for former presidents sent to prison, which isn't something that needed hindsight given Nixon came close.firlandsfarm wrote: ↑Thu Aug 17, 2023 12:56 pmOK, I appreciate the limited application of your comment but let's just assume he does receive a prison sentence if found guilty ... I heard this morning that is highly unlikely because a former President is entitled to full protection for life (On January 10, 2013, President Barack Obama signed the Former Presidents Protection Act of 2012, reinstating lifetime Secret Service protection for his predecessor George W. Bush, himself, and all subsequent presidents.) ... so would his Secret Service protection squad have to go to jail with him?!!
Strictly speaking, there's no reason why they can't send him to prison with his security detail given access and working shifts to protect him. It's not as if the other prisoners will be armed or Trump will be mixing and eating his dinner with them. Alternatively, he could be placed under house arrest, but personally, I think he should be sent to Guantanamo Bay. He'll have all the security he needs there.
All I really want is to see him locked up. He can have a small exercise yard but no access to a golf course and he should be eating proper authentic prison food.
-
firlandsfarm
- Posts: 3491
- Joined: Sat May 03, 2014 8:20 am
You only make things up against people who are innocent. When somebody's guilty as hell and you have hours of smoking gun video tape of it, there's no need to fabricate where the blame lies. I'm sure they'll find the culprit and then it's just a question of following the chain of command, see where it leads.firlandsfarm wrote: ↑Thu Aug 17, 2023 9:12 pmNo problem, I'm sure he will be blamed personally just like he has for everything else.
-
Archery1969
- Posts: 4478
- Joined: Thu Oct 24, 2019 8:25 am
Most experts for/against Trump seem to agree that if found guilty then he would be sent to a Military Prison on the mainland as they have armed military guards inside the prison. Civilian prisons only have armed guards in watch towers and guarding the perimeter fences/walls. Inside civilian prisons lags always get hold of shanks and other items stolen from wood /metal working rooms.Derek27 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 17, 2023 1:07 pmIt would be a new test to the constitution. I doubt the 2012 Act made provisions for former presidents sent to prison, which isn't something that needed hindsight given Nixon came close.firlandsfarm wrote: ↑Thu Aug 17, 2023 12:56 pmOK, I appreciate the limited application of your comment but let's just assume he does receive a prison sentence if found guilty ... I heard this morning that is highly unlikely because a former President is entitled to full protection for life (On January 10, 2013, President Barack Obama signed the Former Presidents Protection Act of 2012, reinstating lifetime Secret Service protection for his predecessor George W. Bush, himself, and all subsequent presidents.) ... so would his Secret Service protection squad have to go to jail with him?!!
Strictly speaking, there's no reason why they can't send him to prison with his security detail given access and working shifts to protect him. It's not as if the other prisoners will be armed or Trump will be mixing and eating his dinner with them. Alternatively, he could be placed under house arrest, but personally, I think he should be sent to Guantanamo Bay. He'll have all the security he needs there.
All I really want is to see him locked up. He can have a small exercise yard but no access to a golf course and he should be eating proper authentic prison food.
It’s one thing locking a former president up but a totally different situation making sure he protected during his incarceration. Some may like it but there would be uproar if a former president was stabbed/killed in prison.
However, he is very unlikely to remain locked up anywhere for very long however long the sentence he given. Soon as republicans got back into power then he would be freed by presidential pardon. Even democrats are unlikely to see him locked up for 10, 20, 30 years as it would be a very bad reflection on US politics internally.
I suspect, in reality, if found guilty he will have all assets seized, 10 year prison term and be released after 2 years to house arrest for the remainder. But with strict rules on what he can do on social media etc.
You never know though, Putin might send in his cardboard soldiers, ships, tanks, drones and nukes to rescue his mate.
-
firlandsfarm
- Posts: 3491
- Joined: Sat May 03, 2014 8:20 am
-
sionascaig
- Posts: 1727
- Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2015 9:38 am
I always thought US conviction rates were extremely high but it turns out they are similar to UK rates c75% to 85%. He should be thankful it's not China though: 99.9%.firlandsfarm wrote: ↑Fri Aug 18, 2023 7:17 amI must swat up on my knowledge of USA law, I didn't realise that in the USA being charged meant you are guilty!
Suspect conviction rates for very rich people are low however.
He's not guilty because he's charged, he's guilty of what he's said. The thing about Trump is that everything he says, including much of what he says in private behind closed doors when he doesn't know he's being recorded, is in the public domain, so the evidence is plain to see.firlandsfarm wrote: ↑Fri Aug 18, 2023 7:17 amI must swat up on my knowledge of USA law, I didn't realise that in the USA being charged meant you are guilty!
Nobody has a problem accusing a footballer of a red card offence on video evidence prior to a formal FA hearing.
You didn't think there was any chance of Lucy Letby being cleared, did you?
-
firlandsfarm
- Posts: 3491
- Joined: Sat May 03, 2014 8:20 am
Well as I have said before Derek I'm sure you are right as always. Though our standards for someone being guilty are worlds apart ... I'm a bit old fashioned, I believe in innocent until PROVEN guilty clearly you believe in guilty without the opportunity to defend yourself! You have no idea how glad I am that you are not and thankfully will never be our Minister for Justice, god knows how many people will be declared guilty before trial ... you know just as Harriet Harman found Boris so guilty!Derek27 wrote: ↑Fri Aug 18, 2023 11:36 amHe's not guilty because he's charged, he's guilty of what he's said. The thing about Trump is that everything he says, including much of what he says in private behind closed doors when he doesn't know he's being recorded, is in the public domain, so the evidence is plain to see.firlandsfarm wrote: ↑Fri Aug 18, 2023 7:17 amI must swat up on my knowledge of USA law, I didn't realise that in the USA being charged meant you are guilty!
Nobody has a problem accusing a footballer of a red card offence on video evidence prior to a formal FA hearing.
You didn't think there was any chance of Lucy Letby being cleared, did you?
-
firlandsfarm
- Posts: 3491
- Joined: Sat May 03, 2014 8:20 am
sionascaig wrote: ↑Fri Aug 18, 2023 8:07 amI always thought US conviction rates were extremely high but it turns out they are similar to UK rates c75% to 85%. He should be thankful it's not China though: 99.9%.firlandsfarm wrote: ↑Fri Aug 18, 2023 7:17 amI must swat up on my knowledge of USA law, I didn't realise that in the USA being charged meant you are guilty!
Suspect conviction rates for very rich people are low however.
I don't doubt the stats sionascaig ... just saying that in a fair society (i.e. not a Derek led society) that determination of guilt should wait until a fair trial has been conducted.Article 6 of the ECHR and the presumption of innocence refers to being found guilty before the application of punishment or incarceration. As I'm not about to beat Trump up and incarcerate him I'm allowed to accuse him of guilt. If he doesn't like it he can sue me for deflamation.firlandsfarm wrote: ↑Fri Aug 18, 2023 9:14 pmWell as I have said before Derek I'm sure you are right as always. Though our standards for someone being guilty are worlds apart ... I'm a bit old fashioned, I believe in innocent until PROVEN guilty clearly you believe in guilty without the opportunity to defend yourself! You have no idea how glad I am that you are not and thankfully will never be our Minister for Justice, god knows how many people will be declared guilty before trial ... you know just as Harriet Harman found Boris so guilty!Derek27 wrote: ↑Fri Aug 18, 2023 11:36 amHe's not guilty because he's charged, he's guilty of what he's said. The thing about Trump is that everything he says, including much of what he says in private behind closed doors when he doesn't know he's being recorded, is in the public domain, so the evidence is plain to see.firlandsfarm wrote: ↑Fri Aug 18, 2023 7:17 am
I must swat up on my knowledge of USA law, I didn't realise that in the USA being charged meant you are guilty!
Nobody has a problem accusing a footballer of a red card offence on video evidence prior to a formal FA hearing.
You didn't think there was any chance of Lucy Letby being cleared, did you?
After all, if the prosecution can't call somebody guilty before trial, than noboby could be tried, could they? The prosecution can't presume innocence.
Audio tape of Trump asking to "find 11,780 votes" together with video of him telling armed thugs to march on the Capitol is 100% proof of guilt.