Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Acquitted but still impeached ... Trump thread 99

991 replies

TheClaws · 12/02/2020 03:00

I’ll tell you a funny story. I’m a member of a very right-wing US politics online discussion group for kicks. The moderator of the group controls - and gets involved in - every discussion. (I should say the membership of this group is over 50K and the number of posts a day is generally 30 or so.) She’s also a typical Trumpian in that she reels off the standard “lamestream mass media” etc lines” and she mutes anyone who disagrees with her.

Anyway, I took her on eventually. She said that the Democratic candidates wanted to get rid of the Constitution. To this, I replied Trump flouts the Constitution on a regular basis. “What? Provide examples!” she replies. “Emoluments clause,” I replied. “That’s just one.”

GUYS. SHE HAD NOT HEARD OF THE EMOLUMENTS CLAUSE.

She then just spat something about she doesn’t read mass media lies and that’s why she didn’t know and muted me.

AIBU?

Previous thread: www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/3776378-Happy-Impeachment-Next-step-is-removal-Trump-thread-98

OP posts:
Thread gallery
21
AskingQuestionsAllTheTime · 13/02/2020 16:36

Serious question: i fthe President of the United States were literally to shoot someone, would he be arrested and subsequently tried for murder/manslaughter? Or would he have to be impeached first?

lionheart · 13/02/2020 22:11

He just can't stop himself.

www.politico.com/news/2020/02/13/trump-new-york-investigations-114991

AcrossthePond55 · 13/02/2020 22:15

Asking

The Constitution doesn't really say. It specifies impeachment & removal for 'high crimes and misdemeanors', but says nothing at all as to whether or not a sitting POTUS can be arrested and tried for a crime. I don't think the Founding Fathers even considered the possibility that anyone who could be our POTUS would ever commit a violent or major crime of any kind.

Back during Watergate the DOJ's policy was that 'a sitting president cannot be indicted for a crime', but that ruling was specifically aimed at Nixon and the break-in and has obviously never been tested in court. DOJ seemed to be indicating that the 'correct' procedure would be impeachment, removal by the Senate, then arrest, indictment etc. I think the DOJ wasn't even considering the possibility of a violent crime for which someone should receive swift justice. Just the 'white collar crime' which would be 'on hold' until the POTUS was impeached & removed.

I think until a POTUS commits a 'real' crime (murder, robbery, rape/sexual assault) we'll never know the 'Constitutionality' of the DOJ's policy. We'll certainly never learn it with this AG (Barr).

There's a HUGE disconnect between our justice system and 'white collar crime', especially when that crime is committed by someone in power or with money. Miss Betty-the-clerk embezzles $500 from her employer? Throw her in the slammer. The POTUS violates the emoluments clause or a hedge fund manager rips off a little old lady of her life savings? Look the other way and say 'Tut-tut, such a shame'. Or in the case of the former "Fake News!!!".

AskingQuestionsAllTheTime · 13/02/2020 22:29

Thank you, lionheart and Across the Pond.

lionheart · 13/02/2020 22:44

www.gq.com/story/bloomberg-sexism

Original poster
TheClaws · 13/02/2020 22:51

Let’s ‘ask’ NY to drop all their pending, “unnecessary” cases against me like the mobster I am. I have a job to do, and I must be able to do it unhindered by law, common sense, the Constitution, and global niceties. Thank you.

Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump 4hr

I’m seeing Governor Cuomo today at The White House. He must understand that National Security far exceeds politics. New York must stop all of its unnecessary lawsuits & harrassment, start cleaning itself up, and lowering taxes. Build relationships, but don’t bring Fredo!

OP posts:
AcrossthePond55 · 14/02/2020 02:12

but don’t bring Fredo!

Another 'what the fuck does that even mean??'.

Does he mean Fredo as in Fredo Corleone from The Godfatherr? And does that have some hidden meaning seeing as NY's Governor Cuomo is Italian American? Is he trying to imply some Mafia connection?

He's so full of shit it comes out both ends.

AcrossthePond55 · 14/02/2020 02:15

And besides, Fredo was (bless his heart) a bit of a dope. Who'd be worried about him? If you were going to worry about someone bringing a movie-mafiosi to a meeting then you'd think he would have said "Don't bring Sonny or Michael".

Original poster
TheClaws · 14/02/2020 05:26

This is so easily fact-checked it hurts. (Donald Trump Jr. is stating this.) He did spend summers there with his maternal grandfather in a rural area of Czechoslovakia. It is extremely unlikely he would have encountered any bread lines, let alone waited in them. This is pandering to Trump’s base, who don’t understand socialism. (Or autocracy, either, by the enthusiasm they are encouraging it.)

Koko @Kokomothegreat 1hr

Wait, what?

“I grew up in communist Czechoslovakia... I waited in those bread lines. I can assure you they are not glamorous as Bernie and academia make them out to be.”

twitter.com/kokomothegreat/status/1228163434153304064?s=21

OP posts:
Roussette · 14/02/2020 07:34

Would anyone honestly believe TrumpJr. stood in a bread line? It's laughable! His mother Ivana had escaped communist Czechoslovakia way before she even met Trump. It's laughable.

Lweji · 14/02/2020 07:49

Chris Cuomo, the journalist. The Governor's brother.
Yes, meant as a double insult.

www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-insults-gov-cuomos-brother-ahead-of-white-house-meeting-dont-bring-fredo.amp

lionheart · 14/02/2020 08:19

Donald Jr. is auditioning to be 46. They believe they are untouchable.

www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/local/school-bullying-trump-words/

'Two kindergartners in Utah told a Latino boy that President Trump would send him back to Mexico, and teenagers in Maine sneered "Ban Muslims" at a classmate wearing a hijab. In Tennessee, a group of middle-schoolers linked arms, imitating the president's proposed border wall as they refused to let nonwhite students pass. In Ohio, another group of middle-schoolers surrounded a mixed-race sixth-grader and, as she confided to her mother, told the girl: "This is Trump country."'

TheNorthWestPawsage · 14/02/2020 09:49

Through the looking glass and beyond.
www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-trump-administrations-kafkaesque-new-way-to-thwart-visa-applications/2020/02/13/190a3862-4ea3-11ea-bf44-f5043eb3918a_story.html

(And as a UK poster - this is coming to a Home Office near you soon.)

Lweji · 14/02/2020 09:57

Donald Jr. is auditioning to be 46. They believe they are untouchable.

Wasn't it supposed to be Ivanka? This won't be pretty.

lionheart · 14/02/2020 11:47

He certainly seems to prefer Ivanka.

I don;t believe for one second that Barr and co have decided to follow the law and the basic principles governing the DOJ.

www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/mitch-mcconnell-trump-barr-tweeting_n_5e45f080c5b64433c613a553?ri18n=true

Leaannb · 14/02/2020 12:29

@TheClaws They completely wasted time with the impeachment. What little they found out did nothing. He was still acquitted. They should have used that time shoring up their support for a decent opponent for Trump. The only thing they did was risk their seat making it very,very possible for a completely controlled Republican Congress with a Republican President. Trump will win re-election. There is absolutely no doubt about that. Sanders is way too far Socialist to win. So people are going to vote for the devil they know instead of Bernie promising the moon knowing there is no way to get it. Trump will be re-elected. It’s not being defeatist but pragmatic. People would rather have Trump than Bernie

AskingQuestionsAllTheTime · 14/02/2020 13:39

Correct me if I am wrong, but I didn't think Sanders had won the nomination?

TheNorthWestPawsage · 14/02/2020 13:42

Bloomberg apparently being named in 40 sexual harassment cases. So is he everything Trump is but with a lot more money in his pocket to buy silence?

From Amy Siskind:

  1. The stuff coming out on Bloomberg: redlining yesterday - 40 sexual harassment cases by 64 women not allowed to speak because of NDAs, etc should give every Democrat pause. The precedent to our democracy of buying an election. This stuff will keep coming out. He would lose.
  1. I worked on Wall Street at the time of these lawsuits. What I am reading about his treatment of women employees was NEVER accepted or normal behavior back then. He would have been fired for these things at any Wall Street firm but his own.
  1. Are we seriously going to look down our noses at women who voted for Trump in 2016 after he said grab em by the pussy, but allow this guy to silence 64 women and be our candidate? No way. Women and PoC will not show up and vote for this man as stuff comes out. He will lose.
twitter.com/amy_siskind/status/1228308955723685890?s=21
AskingQuestionsAllTheTime · 14/02/2020 13:46

So he doesn't win the nomination but throws his weight and money behind whoever does.

AcrossthePond55 · 14/02/2020 13:57

Honestly, I don't think that Bloomberg has much of a chance of the nom. Neither does Steyer. We've seen what happens when we put a 'billionaire' businessman in the White House.

IIRC Bloomberg has said if he doesn't get the nom he will funnel up to $1B to the Dems to defeat Scrotus. On the surface I have no problem with that. But again, as a businessman, will he expect a 'quid pro quo' for his cash? Or is his 'hatred' for Scrotus his main motivation?

Lweji · 14/02/2020 14:42

@Leaannb
For someone who isn't in favour of Trump, you seem curiously and overly concerned with presenting his reelection as a fait accomplit and too critical, specifically, of Sanders and the impeachment.

Hmm