Surprise, President-elect doesn't want criminal investigations of a sitting President

[ObsidianJones]

Why shouldn't he go after a "literal neo-nazi and reincarnation of Hitler and the biggest threat to all of humanity"? Seems odd that after all that talk about how Trump is the source of all evil that he, or more accurately, the party, would then back off.

Hyperbole aside, my distaste for Trump doesn't extend to breaking the systems of Checks and Balances for 'petty revenge'.

The President can suggest action in terms of legal matters as a matter of opinion, but he can't act like Judge Dredd and hunt down Donald Trump with wanton abandon. Nor would I want him to. That is out of his purview.

The Legislative Branch | The White House

The United States Congress is made up of the House of Representatives and the Senate. Learn more about the powers of the Legislative Branch of the federal government of the United States.

www.whitehouse.gov

If any Criminal Action is to be levied against Trump, that is the matter for the Judicial Branch.

The Judicial Branch | The White House

Article III of the Constitution of the United States guarantees that every person accused of wrongdoing has the right to a fair trial before a competent judge and a jury of one's peers.

www.whitehouse.gov

I get the sentiment you're going for. But I can think Trump is a bad guy and still want him to be afforded the due process that all of us are supposed to have. My distaste for him will never override the fact that he's a human being and deserves to be treated as such.

 

[Eacaraxe]

Hyperbole aside, my distaste for Trump doesn't extend to breaking the systems of Checks and Balances for 'petty revenge'.

That's the rub; any forthcoming exercise in prosecutorial discretion or allowance of qualified immunity to Trump once he leaves office is in itself a breakdown of checks and balances.

The President can suggest action in terms of legal matters as a matter of opinion, but he can't act like Judge Dredd and hunt down Donald Trump with wanton abandon. Nor would I want him to. That is out of his purview.

He appoints the people whose purview it is, and those people serve at his discretion, which means ultimate control of it still lies with him. A lesson that should be well-baked into the memory of the American public, after the Trump administration's revolving door of people fired for contradicting him or refusing to do his bidding.

If any Criminal Action is to be levied against Trump, that is the matter for the Judicial Branch.

Investigation and prosecution are executive functions, not judicial functions. The judiciary hears and rules on cases, it doesn't present them.

I get the sentiment you're going for. But I can think Trump is a bad guy and still want him to be afforded the due process that all of us are supposed to have.

This isn't a due process issue. It's a prosecutorial discretion issue. Procedural due process pertains to what happens after an indictment is issued.

 

[Revnak]

There is a difference here in that Caesar was not libel for prosecution so long as he was in office as a rule. Maybe I'm unaware of a law but I'm pretty sure a president does not have such an official law protecting them.

Uh, the president can only face legal consequences as part of impeachment proceedings, which are a joke.

 

[ObsidianJones]

That's the rub; any forthcoming exercise in prosecutorial discretion or allowance of qualified immunity to Trump once he leaves office is in itself a breakdown of checks and balances.

He appoints the people whose purview it is, and those people serve at his discretion, which means ultimate control of it still lies with him. A lesson that should be well-baked into the memory of the American public, after the Trump administration's revolving door of people fired for contradicting him or refusing to do his bidding.

Investigation and prosecution are executive functions, not judicial functions. The judiciary hears and rules on cases, it doesn't present them.

This isn't a due process issue. It's a prosecutorial discretion issue.

For Federal cases. But as it has been said many times before, Trump has civil suits and a Manhattan Criminal Probe waiting for him.

These investigations have already started. I believe they are in the courts and just waiting for Trump. So that's why I said Judicial. These cases are waiting from Trump's protections to run out so they can be heard.

 

[Worgen]

What resources? This is why we have an entire executive department dedicated to this exact function. This is literally the DoJ's job, that's what "the resources" are there for in the first place.

Well its totally likely trump will gut various government departments before he goes just as a 'fuck you.' So that means a lot of newer people coming in and having to learn the ropes, plus hes literally giving no transition assistance, in fact hes actively hampering it with people refusing the election results so a lot of the resources that a new administration would have access to, Biden doesn't. Hes got good people and is handling things well, but a major prosecution like that takes time and effort and at the moment there are more important things.

But this also ignores the possibility that Biden might just be saying this so they can try and calm down the trumples, because domestic terror attacks are going to be a thing we will need to worry about cause those fuckers are crazy for their orange gawd.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

Just going to remind everyone: https://reason.com/2020/08/31/joe-biden-riots-looting-protesters-blm-trump/

Biden is now more concerned with prosecuting protesters than he is Trump's corruption. If I were cynical, I'd point out which is more of a threat to his power.

EDIT: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/20...s-rioters-prosecuted-push-back-donald-trumps/

 

[Eacaraxe]

For Federal cases. But as it has been said many times before, Trump has civil suits and a Manhattan Criminal Probe waiting for him.

State and municipal CJ systems still function in the same manner, in which law enforcement and prosecution are functions of those levels' executive branches. If you think the federal government can't snuff a state investigation through backchannels, prosecutorial unfair play, or jurisdiction fighting...well, I don't know what to tell you, let alone after Jeffrey Epstein, the Mafia Commission, or lesser-known and much smaller-scale but still equally relevant, Aaron Swartz.

 

[Specter Von Baren]

Uh, the president can only face legal consequences as part of impeachment proceedings, which are a joke.

Yes, but that's a process to make them face legal consequences while in office, the issue is that it isn't done well nor in good faith. Rome's process had it as law that the council could not be prosecuted while in office but they were fair game once out of office.

 

[ObsidianJones]

State and municipal CJ systems still function in the same manner, in which law enforcement and prosecution are functions of those levels' executive branches. If you think the federal government can't snuff a state investigation through backchannels, prosecutorial unfair play, or jurisdiction fighting...well, I don't know what to tell you, let alone after Jeffrey Epstein, the Mafia Commission, or lesser-known and much smaller-scale but still equally relevant, Aaron Swartz.

I hear what you're saying. And can very well acquiesce.

But the state level is the state level. Out of Federal purview. Therefore the person who would call the shots in this scenario would be Governor Cuomo. Which again, isn't Biden. And again, not his authority or in his scope of duties to actually hunt down Trump over.

Let Trump Pardon himself. It isn't up to Biden to try to overturn that. Nor should he try. But Trump can not pardon himself for NYS's interest in him. And then by your scenario, Cuomo can get the ball rolling on that.

Anyway you slice it, Biden is right not to go after Trump.

 

[Eacaraxe]

But the state level is the state level. Out of Federal purview. Therefore the person who would call the shots in this scenario would be Governor Cuomo. Which again, isn't Biden. And again, not his authority or in his scope of duties to actually hunt down Trump over.

You're conflating the de jure state of affairs with the de facto state of affairs, which is what I'm pointing out. If Biden acting through his appointees in the DoJ wants the investigation killed, and I assure you he does for all the reasons I stated earlier, the investigation will be killed. Cuomo won't be doing shit about it, and neither will anyone in the state prosecutors' office because it would be political suicide. Maybe Eric or Don, Jr., or other associates, see the inside of a courtroom, but I'd lay cold, hard cash Trump himself won't be on the docket. Not a former President of the United states, let alone in a state courtroom.

The bottom line is, it's in Biden's -- and likely more importantly Harris' because she's being obviously set up for her own presidency -- self-interest Trump doesn't. Because again, that sets a precedent no President is going to tolerate, their own criminal liability.

But Trump can not pardon himself for NYS's interest in him.

Food for thought: how and why did Nixon not face indictment in the DC Superior Court? That's not actually a federal jurisdiction, DC Code is roughly equivalent to state code in terms of jurisdiction, despite DC Code being drafted by Congress, and DC cases presented and heard by federally-appointed officials.

 

[Godzillarich(aka tf2godz)]

I'm just gonna say I don't think it's a good idea to prosecute Trump. It would turn them into a martyr for his cult.

let that man died poor and alone

 

[Agema]

I'm just gonna say I don't think it's a good idea to prosecute Trump. It would turn them into a martyr for his cult.

let that man died poor and alone

I'm certainly totally up for the State of New York going through his tax affairs with a fine tooth comb and prosecuting the shit out of any fraud they find. Biden's ideas on the federal government don't extend to what's under state jurisdiction.

 

[Seanchaidh]

Why shouldn't he go after a "literal neo-nazi and reincarnation of Hitler and the biggest threat to all of humanity"? Seems odd that after all that talk about how Trump is the source of all evil that he, or more accurately, the party, would then back off.

All of this has happened before. And all of this will happen again.

Trump could well be a "literal neo-nazi and reincarnation of Hitler and the biggest threat to all of humanity" but pursuing charges against him would still be hypocritical of the Democratic Party. This is what choosing between greater and lesser evils gets you. Evil. And evil has at least some solidarity with evil, if only for pragmatic reasons.

 

[dreng3]

He left before he could be removed. Its not a useless tool, but it is hampered by party loyalty but I mean, what else could we do? Can you come up with anything better then this process?

Without altering the entire political system in the U.S.? No, no I cannot. But that really just speaks to how much of a failure the current system is, doesn't it? If holding the president responsible requires a complete makeover of the system there might just be something wrong with the system.

Alternatively, don't elect the kind of assholes that will follow party over morals, but that seems a high bar for the U.S. so I don't really consider that a viable option.

 

[Revnak]

Yes, but that's a process to make them face legal consequences while in office, the issue is that it isn't done well nor in good faith. Rome's process had it as law that the council could not be prosecuted while in office but they were fair game once out of office.

“Isn’t done well” no it straight doesn’t fucking work. The jury, defense, prosecution, and key witnesses are often basically the same fucking people and most of them are fucking Senators. It is a process that was meant to be useless.

 

[Specter Von Baren]

“Isn’t done well” no it straight doesn’t fucking work. The jury, defense, prosecution, and key witnesses are often basically the same fucking people and most of them are fucking Senators. It is a process that was meant to be useless.

Yes... That's where the "nor in good faith" comes in.

 

[Revnak]

Yes... That's where the "nor in good faith" comes in.

Still frames it as if the problem is the lowly mortals of modernity failing to live up to the grand ideals of the constitution when really the impeachment process was dumb the moment they came up with it.

 

[Revnak]

All of this has happened before. And all of this will happen again.

Trump could well be a "literal neo-nazi and reincarnation of Hitler and the biggest threat to all of humanity" but pursuing charges against him would still be hypocritical of the Democratic Party. This is what choosing between greater and lesser evils gets you. Evil. And evil has at least some solidarity with evil, if only for pragmatic reasons.

Moralizing electoralism is bull, even when we do it dude. Calling everyone “evil” then washing your hands of the process is ignoring the reality of the situation in favor of convenient fables. There’s better arguments for hating the Dems than doing their own work of perpetuating the empty moralistic framing of politics for them.

 

[Seanchaidh]

Moralizing electoralism is bull, even when we do it dude. Calling everyone “evil” then washing your hands of the process is ignoring the reality of the situation in favor of convenient fables. There’s better arguments for hating the Dems than doing their own work of perpetuating the empty moralistic framing of politics for them.

What is the reality of the situation?

 

[Revnak]

What is the reality of the situation?

That whether or not they’re moral, they’re self-involved, and it is unreasonable to expect the interests of career politicians, lawyers, and capitalists to align with our own. Morality has nothing to do with it.