Should Donald Trump fail a second time to be re-elected he faces the very real possibility of jail time and massive financial penalties due to the sheer volume of criminal cases and civil lawsuits that are on hold until after the election.

That is the opinion of Syracuse University law professor Greg Germain who explained in an interview with Newsweek that the former president’s only path to get out from under the federal cases he now faces is to beat Vice President Kamala Harris in less than two weeks and then push the Department of Justice to drop the cases filed against him.

As Germain stated, the multiple federal cases Trump is facing are solid and his only path to victory may be having them shut down.

Newsweek source: https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-legal-cases-georgia-washington-florida-new-york-stormy-daniels-chutkan-cannon-1974406

  • SeanBrently@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 minutes ago

    How many times over the last 4 years have I been told “Oh, they really got him now!” Do any wealthy politicians face consequences for the shady stuff they do( I include democrats in this category)?

    And then I think about George Floyd who tried to buy a pack of smokes with a phony $20, and possibly didn’t even know it was counterfeit, but was killed shortly thereafter.

    This is not the America I want

  • Sam_Bass@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 hour ago

    all thats needed to make that image sweeter is a blindfold, a cigarette, and a line of 9 infantrymen with rifles loaded and ready

  • riodoro1@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    47
    ·
    12 hours ago

    Why exactly are they on hold until the election? Shouldn’t it be like really important to determine if he’s guilty before they crown him?

    • fine_sandy_bottom@lemmy.federate.cc
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      12 hours ago

      I felt the same for a long time, but as much as I hate to admit it, it does kind of make sense in an abhorrent kind of way.

      The hierarchy in a democracy is supposed to go…

      Voting Public ➡️ Representatives ➡️ Laws ➡️ Courts ➡️ Rulings

      That being the case, a Court shouldn’t really hear cases that might undermine the will of the Voting Public.

      If courts are empowered by the Voting Public, then a Court should not be in a position to make a Ruling the Voting Public does not want, despite that Ruling being correct in the context of the Law.

      Another way of saying the same thing, is that if the Voting Public want’s Trump to have a fair trial they would obviously not elect him as President.

      • postmateDumbass@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        4 hours ago

        While you make a point to consider, an educated and informed electorate is bedrock to a democracy.

        Maybe the results of the Discovery process should be public record before a vote.

      • riodoro1@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        10 hours ago

        Well, if the voting public has ultimate say than why are there rules on who can become president in the first place?

      • AAA@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        11 hours ago

        I understand your viewpoint, but disagree.

        By that argument any criminal ever could argue against prosecution because they intend to run for a public office. Ridiculous exaggeration of course, but if Trump gets this chance, everyone else should too.

        • fine_sandy_bottom@lemmy.federate.cc
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          10 hours ago

          Not really, as you said it’s just not within the realm of possibility for anyone else.

          Trump stands a good chance of being elected in a few weeks. An unfavourable court ruling would undermine that. Do you want to live in a country where courts are more powerful than the will of the people?

          Also, imagine what would happen if he did get locked up now. It would be pandemonium, and not without reason.

          The only way to get rid of Trump is to vote against him, then watch him fade into irrelevance.

          • Mike1576218@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 hour ago

            Can the press be above the voting population? Surely not. So they shouldn’t be allowed to publish articles with uncomfortable thruths about a candidate? Also the democrats, they say bad thruths about trump. They shouldn’t be allowed to say that.

          • DragonTypeWyvern
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            4 hours ago

            You’re describing why convictions shouldn’t bar people from voting or running for office and deciding it means the powerful should be above the law.

          • AAA@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            edit-2
            8 hours ago

            It’s not just. He should be locked up for his crimes. If people would want him released, they’d have to vote for a candidate who promises to do that. Just being a promising candidate isn’t a reason not to be prosecuted. There is simply no law for that.

            The justice system is being intimidated by an angry mob into waiting out the situation. This is against everything what the justice system is supposed to do.

            It’s not the will of “the people”, it’s the will of a minority. He HAS been voted out. Courts should indeed be more powerful than that.

  • Buffalox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    160
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    criminal cases and civil lawsuits that are on hold until after the election.

    Why are they on hold? It’s insane it’s taken so long to push those cases, and it’s even more insane if they are on hold.
    Trump is a normal citizen, and shouldn’t enjoy special privileges.

    Except USA is no-longer a country of law, it’s a corrupt oligarchy.

    • orcrist@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      14 hours ago

      Not everything is on hold. The dates and deadlines are simply not right now. Lawyers are preparing motions and the like in the background. Work continues. Of course that varies by case.

    • farngis_mcgiles@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      19 hours ago

      Except USA is no-longer a country of law, it’s a corrupt oligarchy.

      it always has been lol originally only white property owners could vote

    • granolabar@kbin.melroy.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      48
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 day ago

      Always has been but normal people just finally starting to understand how bad it really is.

      Modern oligarchs dont even pretend anymore and they dont have since peasants are fighting each. They dont care who wins elections for the most part as they will mostly get what they want either way

    • crusa187@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      Merrick Garland is a failure of epic proportions. It is a small silver lining that the Repugs blocked his Supreme Court nomination, not that their picks were better.

    • Lets_Eat_Grandma@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 day ago

      Except USA is no-longer a country of law, it’s a corrupt oligarchy.

      It’s always been this way. The internet just does a better job of propagating information about it.

      • Buffalox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        29
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        No, Nixon stepped down because of Watergate, you won’t see similar honesty from Republicans today.
        They are exploiting the judicial system, and to Prosecute Trump for things he did in the open as president to enrich himself and his family isn’t pursued, even now after 8 years.
        After Nixon the Republicans decided to try to control the courts and the political narrative, so they never would lose a case either legally or in the public eye like Watergate again.
        Republicans have been systematically undermining USA for 5 decades now.

        It’s way past the time to stop it, If Harris doesn’t win, and start the process towards legal and political normalcy, it could easily be to late.

    • Wojwo@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      1 day ago

      I get the frustration, but I also get where the authorities are coming from. Imagine if precident gets set that a political candidate can be mired down in lawsuits, regardless if they’re plausible or not. Then someone like trump comes along and says cool that worker great against me, I’ll just throw a shit ton of made up lawsuits and cases against all my future opponents.

      • jettrscga@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        24
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        Except that he’s explicitly choosing to be a political candidate for the purpose of avoiding the lawsuits. A lot of these allegations occurred before he announced he was re-running, and then the lawsuits got put on hold.

        Your scenario creates a method for anyone to delay consequences by running for office. Although we both know it wouldn’t really work for anyone. Trump gets his special treatment.

      • Buffalox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        No that’s a false narrative, the criminal cases are based on public prosecutors running them.
        What you are claiming is for civil suits, of which a couple have been settled, despite obstruction attempts by Trump.
        If it gets to a point where a politician can ask public prosecutors to put opponents in jail, USA has long ceased to be a democracy.

        Trump is already a convicted criminal, and cannot vote in several states, still he can run for president, and enjoy privileged treatment.
        Where an ordinary person voting because she was told she could, got 5 years prison for voter fraud!

      • Volkditty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        1 day ago

        In your scenario, do you imagine that all the Trump-appointed prosecutors and the Trump-appointed judges will willingly delay the cases of Trump’s “enemies of the state” until after the election out of some respect for the sanctity of the democratic process?

        It is a horrible, dangerous precedent to say we can’t justly hold the guilty accountable because some bad actor in the future may unjustly hold the innocent accountable.

  • orcrist@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    14 hours ago

    The information is true but the article is thin. There’s no new information or interpretations in it.

  • chuckleslord@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    21 hours ago

    Trump, his back against the wall.

    The Tamarian phrase for important things that need to happen but won’t happen in time.

  • octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    1 day ago

    I for one am livid that I’ll have to wait until after the election to see the disappointing wrist slaps he might get from whichever cases don’t get sabotaged by sympathetic judges.

    • espentan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      24 hours ago

      It really is outrageous.

      I suppose “I’m running for president, let me go” is the new thing to say if you don’t feel like going to prison right away. /s

        • Orbituary@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          It is a federal crime to threaten the president with harm or death. It’s a guarantee a federal agent will look deeper at people who make statements like the one you made.

          • zergtoshi@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            Is it really a threat to muse about what could happen as some random person on the internet?
            It’s not like OP announced to do it or called for it to be done.
            I’d see it differently if a person with a lot of followers (especially crazy ones) would dare to think something like this aloud. Does this law cover former presidents as well?

            Anyway… Remember: it’s a losing battle trying to be tolerant of the intolerant!

            • granolabar@kbin.melroy.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 day ago

              In normal context, this likely wouldnt amount to a threat however comments like this about high ranking official esp ex Pres will most definitely getting flagged for a review to asses validity of the threat.

              This is just how the system works. And these comments attract spooks so people should be mindful.

              I am not sure if kill the rich comments get similar attention but i wouldnt be surprised.

          • ravhall@discuss.online
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 day ago

            No one is looking into me, sooo, you’re wrong.

            It is my personal opinion, that his elimination would be better for society. I’m allowed to say whatever I want. And if the “fed” wants to bitch, they can message me and I’ll come down and have a little chat with them. Which will go nowhere, as you know…

  • Media Bias Fact Checker@lemmy.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    1 day ago
    Raw Story - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)

    Information for Raw Story:

    Wiki: unreliable - There is consensus that Raw Story is generally unreliable for factual reporting, based upon a pattern of publishing false and sensationalized stories. Editors almost unanimously agree that the source is biased and that in-text attribution should accompany each use of the source.


    MBFC: Left - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America


    Search topics on Ground.News

    https://www.rawstory.com/trump-legal-peril-2669486881/?

    Media Bias Fact Check | bot support