• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Justice Dept. Is Said to Believe Trump Has More Documents

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Muse said:
How long is this going to take? This man is a menace to the United States of America and all its citizens.
Click to expand...

Looks like a long long time.
Especially when you have people like Herschel Walker about to win a United States senate seat, it definitely appears that democracy is moving backward, not forward.
 
sportage said:
Looks like a long long time.
Especially when you have people like Herschel Walker about to win a United States senate seat, it definitely appears that democracy is moving backward, not forward.
Click to expand...
This is worse than losing democracy, this is allowing sedition of the highest level and doing nothing concrete to prevent the destruction of the country.

BTW, I do not expect H. Walker to become a US Senator. He may, but it is not my expectation.
 
washington post is reporting that tur(d)ump held rehearsals for staff to move/hide the documents if a search warrant was served, with instructions on how to do it. goes to showing willful retention, intent to obstruct, adds conspiracy, possible dissemination. one witness is an MAL employee who helped a moved the boxes but didnt know what was inside.

MSN

www.msn.com
link to wp from msn, no idea if it requires subscription.

beau breaks it down.

this may result in actual charges. instructing his staff on how keep the documents away from the investigators/fbi raises it to conspiracy and a lot of those people who knowingly participated are going to take a plea for testifying for the prosecution.
 
Last edited:
gorobei said:
this may result in actual charges. instructing his staff on how keep the documents away from the investigators/fbi raises it to conspiracy and a lot of those people who knowingly participated are going to take a plea for testifying for the prosecution.
Click to expand...
Lol may? Violating PRA is already 100% being caught with a mountain of documents. We don’t need any of these recent revelations to further confirm his guilt. Well on second thought, it adds to the treason evidence of the flagrant violation of showing certain classified documents to people to show off.
 
Some of Trump's lawyers are defending, or trying to defend Trump's running for president. Trying to downplay Trump's predicament as "simple legal matters". Thats like saying Charlie Manson wasn't a bad guy, he just has some legal matters.
Heck.... Charlie missed his calling. He could have been a president of the United States, with legal matters.
 
What happens in this scenario...trump gets indicted but wins the election, there’s a trial and he’s found guilty and sentenced to prison. What happens next?
 
soundforbjt said:
What happens in this scenario...trump gets indicted but wins the election, there’s a trial and he’s found guilty and sentenced to prison. What happens next?
Click to expand...
If Trump wins the election the justice department would immediately drop the case and if Trump is in prison on either federal or state charges he would be released.
 
soundforbjt said:
So basically no justice.
Click to expand...
Right. That’s the way the country has to work though - there’s no other way to do it.

I wouldn’t be too worried about it though. The most likely scenario by far is indictment and conviction, either through a plea deal or conviction at trial.
 
alien42 said:
A constitutional crisis and perhaps the end of democracy?
Click to expand...
It's not really a constitutional crisis, he would be released from prison and this is how the system is supposed to work.

If being in prison prevented you from running for/being elected president then people like Trump would just imprison their political rivals.
 
fskimospy said:
It's not really a constitutional crisis, he would be released from prison and this is how the system is supposed to work.

If being in prison prevented you from running for/being elected president then people like Trump would just imprison their political rivals.
Click to expand...
So he was right when he said he could someone and get away with it.
 
fskimospy said:
It's not really a constitutional crisis, he would be released from prison and this is how the system is supposed to work.

If being in prison prevented you from running for/being elected president then people like Trump would just imprison their political rivals.
Click to expand...
Where is it dictated or written he would be released from Prison if he won the Presidency? Winning the Presidency doesn't abolish his conviction or sentence. He would have to be Pardon for that to happen, and he would have to test his theory that he can self pardon first. I understand the question would be "how can he run the country from prison".. Well, easy, solitary confinement in a wing of Prison that no other inmates have access, and all gaurds and such have top secret security clearance. etc. It could be managed, it wouldn't be easy, but if the voting population is stupid enough to put a criminal back in the Presidency, then it shouldn't be easy, cheap, and it should be a stain on this country for the world to see.
 
Last edited:
NWRMidnight said:
Where is it dictated or written he would be released from Prison if he won the Presidency? Winning the Presidency doesn't abolish his conviction or sentence. He would have to be Pardon for that to happen, and he would have to test his theory that he can self pardon first.
Click to expand...
Well considering he would be in charge of all federal prisons and their staff presumably he could just order the guards to unlock his cell and go home for the day.

In a more legalistic sense the DOJ would declare that any conviction by an article 3 court that imprisons a president is an unconstitutional usurpation of executive power by the judiciary and so all criminal statutes are unconstitutional as applied to a sitting president.
 
fskimospy said:
Well considering he would be in charge of all federal prisons and their staff presumably he could just order the guards to unlock his cell and go home for the day.

In a more legalistic sense the DOJ would declare that any conviction by an court that imprisons a president is an unconstitutional usurpation of executive power by the judiciary and so all criminal statutes are unconstitutional as applied to a sitting president.
Click to expand...
I don't believe the President has the authority to order guards to do anything at federal prisons. The only influence he has on the federal prison, it's guards, and it's inmates, is his pardoning powers. There is nothing in the constitution that prevents a sitting President from being charged, tried, or convicted for crimes by the DOJ, as a conviction does not remove him or stop him from being President. That can only be done by Congress thru the impeachment process. It's only been a POLICY of the DOJ not to indict a sitting President, it's not dictated by the constitution, nor would it go against anything in the constitution.
 
NWRMidnight said:
I don't believe the President has the authority to order guards to do anything at federal prisons. There is nothing in the constitution that prevents a sitting President from being charged, tried, or convicted for crimes by the DOJ, as a conviction does not remove him or stop him from being President. That can only be done by thru the impeachment process. It's only been a POLICY of the DOJ not to indict a sitting President, it's not dictated by the constitution.
Click to expand...
He is in charge of essentially all federal employees absent things like the capitol police. If he doesn't have the authority then who would? Even if you want to say he doesn't have the authority then he would just name a cabinet member who would direct his subordinates down the chain to unlock the door. Any that refuse to do it are reassigned until you find someone willing to do it. As far as what the DOJ would determine, it would determine whatever Trump told them to determine.

There is a 0% chance of a sitting president being incarcerated in a federal facility. Also any state level facility he was in would be required to release him too.
 
fskimospy said:
He is in charge of essentially all federal employees absent things like the capitol police. If he doesn't have the authority then who would? Even if you want to say he doesn't have the authority then he would just name a cabinet member who would direct his subordinates down the chain to unlock the door. Any that refuse to do it are reassigned until you find someone willing to do it. As far as what the DOJ would determine, it would determine whatever Trump told them to determine.

There is a 0% chance of a sitting president being incarcerated in a federal facility. Also any state level facility he was in would be required to release him too.
Click to expand...
The Bureau of Prisons is in charge of Federal Prisons, where the DOJ has authority over it. It is a fact that the only power the President has in regard to any inmates is thru his pardoning powers, and he does not have the direct authority to dictate what the manpower within the Federal prison can and can't do.

But now you have changed your argument to he can manipulate the chain of command by firing those that won't do as he says, even if it is not within his authority, and replace them with people who will. So we can agree that your previous claim, that he can just order the guard to unlock his cell and he can just walk out and go home (paraphrased) was not factual, as you have verified with your rebuttal here.

The same can be said about your claim that indicting him and convicting him is unconstitutional, which it's not unconstitutional. You have changed your argument here as well. Both claims come down to Trump having to remove and replace those down the chain of command to accomplish what you claim he can do directly, and/or claimed was unconstitutional. Neither of which is factual.
 
Last edited:
NWRMidnight said:
The Bureau of Prisons is in charge of Federal Prisons. It is a fact that the only power the President has in regard to any inmates is thru his pardoning powers, and he does not have the direct authority to dictate what the manpower within the Federal prison can and can't do.

But now you have changed your argument to he can manipulate the chain of command by firing those that won't do as he says, even if it is not within his authority, and replace them with people who will. So we can agree that your previous claim, that he can just order the guard to unlock his cell and he can just walk out and go home (paraphrased) was not factual, as you have verified with your rebuttal here.

The same can be said about your claim that indicting him and convicting him is unconstitutional, which it's not unconstitutional. You have changed your argument here as well. Both claims come down to Trump having to remove and replace those down the chain of command to accomplish what you claim he can do directly, and/or claimed was unconstitutional. Neither of which is factual.
Click to expand...
No, you misunderstood my post. I was treating your argument in the most favorable light possible to show you that even if you were correct that he didn't have the personal authority he would just have it done anyway. The president has direct authority over all employees of the executive branch and he could personally order the guard to release him. Same goes for the DOJ - Trump could declare it unconstitutional himself or he could order the DOJ to declare it on his behalf.

Now guards could resign instead of following his orders or something like that but then he could just keep ordering new guards to do it until he found one that was compliant. Simply put - Trump (if he were to be elected again) would run all federal prisons! He can run them as he sees fit, up to and including determining that his incarceration is unconstitutional and ordering his own release, which he 100% would, and it would 100% be done.
 
fskimospy said:
No, you misunderstood my post. I was treating your argument in the most favorable light possible to show you that even if you were correct that he didn't have the personal authority he would just have it done anyway. The president has direct authority over all employees of the executive branch and he could personally order the guard to release him. Same goes for the DOJ - Trump could declare it unconstitutional himself or he could order the DOJ to declare it on his behalf.

Now guards could resign instead of following his orders or something like that but then he could just keep ordering new guards to do it until he found one that was compliant. Simply put - Trump (if he were to be elected again) would run all federal prisons! He can run them as he sees fit, up to and including determining that his incarceration is unconstitutional and ordering his own release, which he 100% would, and it would 100% be done.
Click to expand...
No, I didn't misunderstand anything you said. You think that, because you believe that the President has full authority over all employees of the executive branch, which he does primarily thru the heads of those departments, EXCEPT for the DOJ IG. If you believe otherwise, I urge you to research 1978, post-Watergate insurgence , where Congress gave them extraordinary functional independence within the executive branch and made them more beholden to Congress, and not the President.

Hard to claim something unconstitutional that isn't backed up by the constitution or has language that supports such a claim. You are trying to argue opinion (yours) and not facts.
 
By the way, it's perfectly reasonable to say that this interpretation of the law and Constitution is wrong, I'm just telling you what would happen in reality. The people responsible for stopping that kind of outrageous conduct would be either 1) the cabinet that Trump himself appointed (good luck) or 2) Congress (lol). We both know neither would act, and therefore Trump walks.

The good news is it's pretty unlikely he'll be president again and so he can just go to prison the regular old way.
 
NWRMidnight said:
No, I didn't misunderstand anything you said. You think that, because you believe that the President has full authority over all employees of the executive branch, which he only thru the heads of those departments, EXCEPT for the DOJ IG. If you believe otherwise, I urge you to research 1978, post-Watergate insurgence , where Congress gave them extraordinary functional independence within the executive branch and made them more beholden to Congress, and not the President.

Hard to claim something unconstitutional that isn't backed up by the constitution or has language that supports such a claim. You are trying to argue opinion (yours) and not facts.
Click to expand...
You did misunderstand what I said - if you had understood my post correctly you would not have thought I changed my position.

Also no, there is no requirement that the president exercise his authority through department heads, he is free to run the departments personally if he has the time and interest. In a practical sense even if that were true though it wouldn't matter as all you do is appoint apparatchiks to those posts who will carry out your every whim.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top