• superkret@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    417
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    Interesting.

    When a rich man is sentenced to prison, and then actually has to go to prison, it’s called a “legal loophole”.

    • Miles O'Brien@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      161
      ·
      1 month ago

      My first thought was “So we call ‘following the law’ a loophole now?”

      If the law meant a fucking thing, he would have been in prison decades ago.

        • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          31
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          In a word: Garland.

          In two words: Merrick Garland

          In three words: fucking Merrick Garland

          In four words: fucking Merrick “Slowclown” Garland

          In five words: establishment hack as attorney general.

        • winterayars@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          17
          ·
          1 month ago

          'The voters are going to reject him and then we don’t have to go through all this messy business if prosecution."

          It’s the moral elevation of inaction for its own sake above action for any reason.

  • Stovetop@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    247
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    Fun to think about, but I can promise that Trump will never see consequences for his actions. Everything just miraculously slides right off of him.

  • Asafum@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    196
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 month ago

    Yeah fucking right. Jesus Christ. We need to just accept that it’s over. He’s never going to face any consequences and NY is not sending anyone to the White House to drag him out…

  • abracaDavid@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    136
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 month ago

    This country will never, ever prosecute a president because it would set a precedent of holding our politicians accountable. Ain’t happening. We’ve all been watching Pelosi do insider trading for decades.

    • Nick@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      43
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      Except he’s already been prosecuted and found guilty. This is the sentencing. Now the question is will New York state sentence and imprison him before he takes office.

      • SailorMoss@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        1 month ago

        He’s just not going to show up and will stay in FL till after inauguration. If you think they’re going to hold politicians to the same standard as you and me you’re incredibly naïve.

      • Bakkoda@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        1 month ago

        It’s gonna be interesting because we are clearly at a level of manipulation where the sheer act of being held accountable will 100% be called persecution. From here on out any attempt to hold a politician accountable will be met with resistance and end up being theatre.

    • Jumpingspiderman@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      30
      ·
      1 month ago

      As reprehensible as it is morally, Congresscritters can STILL legally trade based on their insider info they get from their Congresscritter jobs. So there’s really no crime to prosecute. There SHIOULD be, but there isn’t.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      1 month ago

      Politicians doing insider trading is not limited to Pelosi, and somehow not illegal. At least Congress has more ethics standards than courts, but it’s an extremely low bar and unreasonable to be held to such lower standard than the rest of us

      • bitjunkie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        The “somehow” isn’t a big leap… The people who would have to outlaw it are the exact ones benefitting from the broken status quo, same as it ever was.

    • Timmy_Jizz_Tits@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 month ago

      Insider trading is actually legal for congress though. You’re point is valid for systemic issues but this specific one boils down to the individuals involved. There is no precedent for this, no one can really say the judge did anything improper. It would likely be a boon for the governor in a blue state and who knows the DA ambitions.

      I’m mostly making counterpoints than a prediction though. I still don’t think anything major will happen.

    • Jtotheb@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      Yes, the second most pressing concern in everyone’s lives after a second Trump term—Nancy Pelosi’s husband

      • abracaDavid@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        No one is saying that. It’s just blatant corruption in front of the entire country for everyone to see.

        • Jtotheb@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          Hey, you drew the comparison. The whole world of corrupt US politicians to choose from. Don’t like the conclusion people draw when they read exactly what you’ve written? Just write something else lol

      • brown567@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        I’m concerned about Pelosi’s husband! Didn’t he get attacked by a dude with a hammer? I wouldn’t wish that on anyone

    • ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      38
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 month ago

      Its stronger on reddit. Front page is filled with “Biden should resign and make Kamala the first woman president to ‘break the glass barrier’” and “Biden should appoint Kamala Harris to the supreme court” and “Biden shoud make an official act to do X”.

      • WoodScientist@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        58
        ·
        1 month ago

        I mean. Rationally speaking, shouldn’t Biden do something extreme at this moment?

        This is one core problem Kamala had. Her message was “Donald Trump is a Nazi,” yet the entire Biden administration never treated him like some existential threat to Democracy.

        You know all those hypotheticals about killing Adolf Hitler? Notice how no one ever discusses the legality of killing Hitler? It’s all discussions of temporal mechanics or the ethics of punishing someone for a crime before they commit it. No one ever says, “no, you obviously shouldn’t kill Hitler before he comes to power, as that would have been against German law.”

        Realistically, if Kamala’s rhetoric is factual, Biden should have had Trump arrested on day one of his term, charged in a military tribunal for treason, and convicted and sentenced before the first 100 days were complete. The debate should have been whether to give Trump the death penalty, not whether he had presidential immunity. And what about the Supreme Court? What ABOUT the Supreme Court? Did the Allies give much credence to whatever bullshit rulings the Nazi courts issued? Trump should have been pounded into the dirt, and any SCOTUS justices who dared to intervene should have been charged as accomplices. And anyone remotely involved in the plot should have been similarly purged from civil society. We should have seen hundreds, maybe even thousands, of life sentences.

        THAT is how you respond to a threat to democracy. You find absolutely everyone involved and throw the book at them. You move quickly and run roughshod over normal judicial procedure. Lincoln suspended Habeas Corpus and imprisoned people for running pro-Confederate newspapers. That is what you have to do in times where democracy is truly threatened.

        Does Biden actually believe Trump is literally another Adolf Hitler? Then logically, if that is literally true, then Biden should order the military to take him out. Hell, he should do whatever is necessary, upend the entirety of American democracy, become a full dictator if need be. Better a centrist dictator than a Fascist one. In other words, if Trump is literally Hitler, than Biden should be acting right now like our hypothetical time traveler.

        • mm_maybe@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          The problem, I believe, is that most Democrats are institutionalists who will defend the rule of law even when it means handing the reigns over to a group who have openly declared hostility towards it. They are also afraid that using any kind of force to stop Trump and his cronies will trigger violent rebellion and they know who owns most of the guns in this country. They’re playing a trolley problem game but because they don’t really have progressive values they aren’t putting, say, Ukraine, Palestine and the entire fucking climate on the “peaceful transfer of power” track.

          We need a party with higher values than just “defending institutions.”

        • WoahWoah@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          In response to a post highlighting examples of pointless, hyperbolic copium, this guy walks in and says, “hold my beer” and then advocates for Biden to (“logically”) launch a cruise missile at Mar-a-Lago. OMG I’m dying 🤣

          • WoodScientist@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            12
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            “Logically” in the sense that this is the actual logical response, if you take the Biden/Harris rhetoric at face value.

            I mean, maybe if you yourself are a Nazi, then you see nothing wrong with letting Nazis in power. But for sane people, if you actually believe someone to be Hitler, then you should do whatever is necessary, damn the law and Constitution, to keep them out of power.

            The point is not that this is objectively what Biden should do now. The point is that it is IF you assume Harris’s rhetoric is correct, then flagrantly violating the Constitution to keep him out of power is something that should be done. However, realistically, Trump is someone more like Orban or Putin. He does seek to degrade democracy, deport a lot of people, and purposefully immiserate targeted minority groups, but he’s not likely to get the Zyklon B off the shelf any time soon. He’s a monster, but realistically probably not quite at the level of someone like Hitler.

            And this is the problem Harris had in the campaign. If you run on a campaign of “my opponent is Hitler,” the voters will rightfully ask, “well, why hasn’t your administration already turned him into a fine mist?” You don’t put Hitler on trial. You kill Hitler. Running on “my opponent is Hitler,” when you haven’t treated him like you logically should treat Hitler, shows you really don’t believe your own rhetoric.

            • Dasus@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              9
              ·
              1 month ago

              You’re doing a bit of a strawman.

              “My opponent is a fascist” =/= “My opponent is Hitler”

              Did Harris talk about Trump being a literal copy of Hitler who will genocide millions of people in death camps, or did she assert he’s a fascist and a very real threat to democracy?

              Because your rhetoric really only works if you know for a fact that Trump is a literal Hitler. We all know him to be a literal autocrat though.

              flagrantly violating the Constitution to keep him out of power is something that should be done

              So break democracy to save democracy? Ends justify the means? Hindsight is 2020, so if someone tossed you in a timemachine and you found yourself in the 1920’s, you could have the confidence to actually kill Hitler without any qualms, because you’d know what would happen. But no-one has that. We can confidently say Trump is a demented child-rapist who will fuck shit up and make things worse for everyone except his oligarch friends (which very much includes Putin.) We don’t know how bad it’s gonna get, but it’s clearly a downhill the world is facing with a US president like that.

              • piccolo@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 month ago

                Because your rhetoric really only works if you know for a fact that Trump is a literal Hitler. We all know him to be a literal autocrat though

                Lets see here… he’s constantly saying to mass deport all “illegal immigrants” and constantly demonizing them. Made statements about arresting all his poltical opponents, with miltary force if nessecary…

                I dont know, i dont think the hitler guy every did any of those things…

                • Dasus@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  Of course he did those things. He also breathed, shat and ate. Is everyone who breathes, shits and eats a Hitler?

                  I can name dozens of non-Hitlers who’ve done all the things you’ve said.

                  Did Harris run with “Trump is an actual Hitler” or “Trump is a dangerous fascist”?

                  Because if it’s the former, then rationally your argument is a strawman and needs to be amended before more rational conversation can take place.

              • ObliviousEnlightenment@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 month ago

                Yes actually. The ends do justify the meansz and democracy should.be suspended for its own protection if necessary; which clearly it is. I’d go further, the whole republican party shouldve been purged. Paradox of tolerance and all that

      • Karjalan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        27
        ·
        1 month ago

        I mean, the resigning one is way more possible/probable and less disruptive. It’d more be funny than anything, especially if his fans bought lots if “47th” merch, as they’d be supporting Harris

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          Imagine him resigning the day before Trump is sworn in so they’re totally not ready for it. Just to be extra dickish.

      • Timmy_Jizz_Tits@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        My lizard brain is all for the resigning thing. With the message being something about making a statement in the history books about the decision the public made in 2024. Mostly predicting the inevitable disaster of Trumps second term, just like his first term.

        Higher brain thinks that’s just poking a bear though. Ugh. We’re fucked.

    • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      59
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 month ago

      I see Vance as a half smart opportunist, not a full on Fascist.

      I could be wrong.

      • volvoxvsmarla @lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        64
        ·
        1 month ago

        I’m from Germany, so my exposure to US politics is limited (yet still way too much). So, I happened to watch/listen to the new york times podcast interview with vance about 1-2 weeks before the election. Mind you, before that I assumed he was an awkward idiot because all I knew about him was the doughnut thing, laughing at his own joke, and the couch thing. So I basically only tuned in to hear that weird ass man speak for once.

        Apart from the shitty interviewer, I was shocked to find that he would charm me every couple of minutes. Saying people change their minds, people make mistakes, explaining where he is coming from, talking about his wife. This was not who I expected. And I had to remind myself a couple of times: this dude is up to no good. Listen to what he is not saying. Don’t get sucked into this madness.

        But damn he sounded so normal. So human. (Especially in contrast to the stuff I heard about him before.) And since then, I am honestly worried about this guy. I am definitely on the left spectrum politically speaking, and I still found some stuff relatable just by the way he talked. This scared me so much.

        So I agree with you, I think he is an opportunist. And he actually knows what he is doing. I think he knows how to act and speak much better than the left US media tried to portray. They try to ridicule someone who is a very elaborate politician, and this can backfire so much, it’s dangerous. Don’t ridicule the devil in power. I believe if he wanted to, he could wrap a lot of people around his finger.

        • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          I agree. He has done a great job managing his career. We’ll see what happens

        • mm_maybe@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          If you look at the election prediction history graph on Nate Silver’s substack, you see an upwards trajectory for Trump/Vance ever since the vice-presidential debate. That was also when the “Republicans are weird” narrative that was working so well for Harris/Walz abruptly left the discourse. And I believe that what happened was that Republicans who were embarrassed by Vance as well as Trump had a moment like you describe where he suddenly didn’t seem so unrelatable and that right there sunk the Dems… as much as it pains me to admit it, because I’d much rather have a party that wins on the issues and communicates clearly how insane and risky it was to vote for literal autocracy, the Harris campaign probably made the wrong choice with Walz and never should have stopped mocking Republicans for being “weird.”

      • DarkCloud@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        30
        ·
        1 month ago

        Younger generally means more hopeful and ambitious, so it really depends how much Peter Thiel has his hooks in him.

        Vance at least has a non-white wife and is still on his first marriage so probably less bitter.

        • whoisearth@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          20
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          As an aside I was looking up everyone involved with founding PayPal. What a collective bunch of shit stains they are.

          • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 month ago

            Seriously if folks knew what would happen with most of em back in the 90s im pretty some of the real old Rednecks wouldve killed em. Im talking the remains of those who fought in the county and union wars BTW.

      • DogWater@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        Nah he’s a slightly more knowledgeable clown who is even more eager to do what the money backers want

    • whyNotSquirrel@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      I don’t know, is there a lot of couch in the white house, must take some time for him to introduce himself to all of them?

    • Schmoo@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      Theoretically there’s nothing stopping Trump from being president from prison.

      There’s no rule that says a dog can’t play basketball.

  • Furbag@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    84
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    You know how I know this is bullshit? Because even if Trump got the maximum sentence for each of his felony counts, which is three years of prison, they can all be served concurrently, so he would be out by November 2027 with more than a year left of his term.

    If Judge Merchan proceeds with sentencing, Trump’s legal team will just appeal and push it back until after Jan 20th.

    Nice wishful thinking, but Trump winning erased the chances of him ever being held accountable for his crimes against the American people. A majority of Americans felt like he should get away with all of it. On day one he will appoint a sycophant to the DOJ who will drop all of his federal cases, and the state cases will get paused because the President is immune from state prosecution while on office.

    If anybody here wanted to see justice done, you should have shown up on the 5th.

    • PrettyFlyForAFatGuy@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      1 month ago

      so he would be out by November 2027 with more than a year left of his term

      In the extremely unlikely event he was sent to prison for 3 years then Vance would immediately use it as an excuse to invoke the section 4 of the 25th and make himself president.

      Then we’d have a reasonably competent person in the white house delivering Project 2025 instead of the incompetent asshole

    • tigeruppercut@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 month ago

      If he’s not convicted of anything he can’t pardon himself. Is there a statute of limitations on inciting an insurrection, or whatever ge was going to be charged with? Just pick up the case again in Jan 2025.

      • Furbag@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 month ago

        He won’t have to. He’ll just have his own DOJ appointee dismiss the federal cases against him. This will 100% happen on day one of his presidency. I have no doubt in my mind that he already has a person in mind for it and they will be his first appointment after his swearing in.

        For the state cases, he doesn’t need to do anything, they won’t result in a sentencing verdict that can’t be appealed before he takes office, and the state courts cannot prosecute a sitting president.

        The best case scenario is that the state cases that he can neither dismiss nor pardon himself for will resumed at the end of his term in January 2029. That’s a long fucking time to wait for justice, and even then, we won’t know if he will even serve time for it. The presiding judges could die or retire and sympathetic judges could be appointed in the meantime. The states could flip to be controlled by MAGA AGs and decide to drop the cases even while they are paused.

        The likelihood of this guy seeing the inside of a jail cell before he dies is almost 0%.

        • tigeruppercut@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          Oh yeah, I meant 2029 instead of 2025. I know it’s a long time but I was hoping that without an actual verdict the case could be brought up again when (if) the criminals no longer run the justice system. I know some cases are dismissed with and without prejudice, so if there’s any way they can officially be legally/permanently dispensed with I know he’ll do it.

          I guess the best we can hope for is for him to just die soon. Just keep on eating those hamberders

    • Awesomo85@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      17
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      crimes against the American people people of New York.

      FTFY

      Don’t know if you’ve ever been to NY, but they literally hate anyone that isn’t from NY. They used to LOVE Trump and his business practices. Call them shady if you want, but that used to bring in money for NY. Then he started making money in Florida and ran as a Republican. That pissed them off but good!

      They aren’t doing this for the American people. They are doing this for themselves.

      • Furbag@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 month ago

        The hush money payments are not the only things he was being prosecuted for. Jan 6th, the Georgia RICO case, the classified documents case, etc. New York is not the only state that deserves justice.

      • SleepyBear@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        Trump is and has always been a criminal. New York (my home state) just has the balls to actually bring him to court even if he slimes his way out of any real consequence. And believe it or not we dont hate outsiders. Just shady businessmen and people who dont pay their bills.

  • arc@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    69
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Well NY can certainly sentence him, and he can potentially serve a custodial sentence. But I suspect that even if the judge handed him time in prison it wouldn’t be four years and would almost certainly be appealed or delayed to be mostly irrelevant. But I would dearly, dearly, DEARLY love to see this asshole go to prison and preferably never come out.

        • Nuke_the_whales@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 month ago

          That’s wild that you can just pardon yourself. I’m pretty sure that kind of thing was even in the Magna Carta ages ago but it’s a thing still in 2024

          • Jiggle_Physics@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 month ago

            Yeah, the whole idea of having a president, and not a king, is that they are not above the law too. We saw how that idea was ensured by the supreme court.

            • Nuke_the_whales@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 month ago

              I’m convinced that even on the stuff we know and has been proven in court about Trump, would have been enough to dethrone a European monarch, possibly violently, back in the 1800s, but Trump’s supporters and most of the u.s just allows it and roll with it in 2024

              • Jiggle_Physics@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                1 month ago

                I mean, it is fun to joke about. However, I doubt it. Even as late at the 19th century monarchs were blatantly having rivals imprisoned, and executed. Having large groups of people just rounded up and imprisoned, and/or killed, were stealing large amounts of wealth from the tax payers, and just so, so, much shit. They only really ever found themselves suffering legal consequences when other aristocracy decided they needed to go, or that someone else would be better. That, or if material conditions go so bad widespread revolt broke out, and mob justice was served.

          • the_crotch@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 month ago

            It’s wild the president can pardon anyone. It completely bypasses the legal system and gives the executive branch too much power.

      • luciferofastora@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        As I understand it, this is a state case where he can’t. Federal pardon powers extend only to federal cases.

      • Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        Only even hypothetically for federal crimes. State crimes aren’t federal jurisdiction and he has no pardon power over them. Usually pardon power over state crimes is in the hands of the governor.

    • Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      I’d bet either just fines, a suspended sentence or if there is a custodial sentence that it will explicitly be delayed not to begin until Jan 21, 2029. Pretty sure there’s something somewhere about not being able to use law enforcement powers to interfere with the ability of Congress/the Presidency/SCOTUS to do their appointed jobs. Otherwise the Chief of the Capitol Police would be the most powerful legislator in the country, by simply holding legislators he opposes for questioning any times there’s an important vote.

  • CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    62
    ·
    1 month ago

    Nothing in the Constitution prevents the President from holding the office from a jail cell.

    I’m telling you, the premise of this should be a Michael Schur production.

    • humble peat digger@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      People who think trump is going to prison now are delusional.

      That’s the whole point why they suspended sentencing till elections so to see who wins. He’s not getting sentenced now.

      • Chip_Rat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 month ago

        Would he? Honest question I’m not sure how at would work if Trump was imprisoned or died before taking office.

        • rc__buggy@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-20/

          In Section 3:

          If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall become President.

          Wouldn’t surprise me if the GOP martyred Trump, honestly. They can’t have him abdicate or remove him and have MAGA support, but if they could find a way to martyr him they would have their messiah and Thiel’s boy in place. The smart play would be to have him serve more than half of his term though, so Vance could have a shot at 10 years in the White House.

          • Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 month ago

            I figure they’ll wait until Jan 21, 2027 at which point Trump’s death/removal wouldn’t prevent Vance from serving an additional two full terms. Before than and it counts towards the two term limit for Vance.

          • mm_maybe@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 month ago

            I would go so far as to say that this has always ben the plan, at least this time around. I find it highly suspicious that Trump has been the target of assassination attempts by republicans twice (plus a foreign attempt on his life) already. We’re being prepared to accept this as expected when it finally happens, and it has to happen in order to give Vance the pretext to implement martial law and usher in the high-tech Handmaid’s Tale scenario his patrons want. Trump is their useful idiot; but useful only because he is populist and charismatic enough to get them in power via ordinary electoral process. Once they suspend that process entirely they no longer need him and in fact he becomes a liability; offing him kills two birds with one stone.

          • lemonmelon@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 month ago

            We (probably) don’t have a president-elect yet, only a presumptive one. The EC votes have been neither cast nor counted. The most likely point in time at which a candidate becomes president-elect is when the majority of the EC votes have been cast for that candidate, regardless of the counting and certification. Even though we use the term loosely for the assumed winner, the EC adds a layer of weirdness to the legal definition.

              • lemonmelon@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 month ago

                What I’m saying is not about faithless electors. I never mentioned them, so I’m not completely sure what took you down that road.

                There is a legal definition of the term “president-elect” that hasn’t entirely been sorted out. The most widely accepted view is that the candidate who has the majority of EC votes cast for them, regardless of whether those votes have been counted or certified, is legally the president-elect. The nuance to this is that any reference to the president-elect before EC votes have been cast is using the common term, not the legal one.

                The distinction is mostly inconsequential, one major exception being the 20th amendment, which you cited previously. That particular usage is specifically the legal definition, which very likely has not been satisfied until the EC casts their votes. The outcome is that, if those who are meant to uphold the law have any interest in doing so, the 20th amendment does not yet apply, and the legal roles of president-elect and vice president-elect are currently vacant.

    • bss03@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      Judge might sentence him, but ACAB includes DoC, so he’d miraculously escape custody.

  • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    49
    ·
    1 month ago

    Yeah he’s not going to jail. The bastard is just going to keep laughing at us every day. But he’s only got maybe 20 years to go. I would be surprised if 10. He’s basically 20% rotten McDonald’s M double cheeseburger. We might have to deal with princes Vans instead of Maybe one of the other trump princesses. Who knows.

    All we should do is wait and feed him Peanuts or pretzels. He’s bound to choke in one of those things. Either that or the sodium.

    • ooli@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 month ago

      still 20 years! Average USA lifespan for man is 75 year. He should already be dead by now.

      Yes money help with living longer, but with his bad health hygiene it should cancel out.

      • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 month ago

        Average mean means middle…half the population is still alive at average age unfortunately. But fortunately the whole age range is non-linear because nobody gets to be 150 years old. More like 1 person in the world might get to be 125 years old if they never smoked, never had even looked at a MacDonalds burger on TV etc.

        • Phoenicianpirate@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          Jean Clemente (the oldest human ever) smoked cigarettes (she didn’t inhale) and ate pounds of chocolate at a time. The oldest Canadian woman ever smoked until she was in her 90s (she lived to be 116), and plenty of other people who lived to be 100 also had ridiculously unhealthy lifestyles but still lived long.

          For Trump, his father lived to be in his 90s. His grandfather died younger because he was a victim of the Spanish Flu in 1918. We don’t know how long he will live, sadly. But I hope he will die of natural causes soon.

        • ikidd@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          Same as some peasant in any civilized country with universal healthcare. Something like 83 or so.

          • Don_alForno@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            Nope. In countries with universal healthcare life expectancy sadly is still dependent on wealth. Better food, better doctors, lower chance of having a hazardous job, better ability to rest instead of rushing back to work etc etc.

            (i.e. Germany: About 5 years on average between poorest and richest.) Inequality is bad for us, everywhere.

    • Phoenicianpirate@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 month ago

      Given how badly his mental state is doing right now, I wonder if he will even survive his term in office.

      • BlackPenguins@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Same. I wouldn’t be surprised if he was 25th’d a couple years into his presidency due to his declining mental state. But then we get Vance in charge. Which might be worse.

        20 years is way too generous. I put my money on 5 - 7 years left.

    • RidderSport@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 month ago

      20? Isn’t the orange turd 80 or somewhere close? Frankly I wouldn’t be surprised if he died of a natural death soonish

      • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 month ago

        He’s 78. So in two years he’ll be 80 and in Just a teenager he’ll be 100. Jimmy Carter is 100. 0.03% of the population in the US make it to 100. The population was recently ~346,098,610. So he could be 1 of 10 million people who becomes 100.

        According to stupid Google only 60 people get to be 110. Thus Trump’s maximum life is around 20, but that’s being generous. 10 is more probable. But hopefully any time now. Like a really bad sneeze while he’s having his Coca-Cola in the morning ☺️🌄.

      • droans@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        The expected lifespan for someone his age is about another 9 years per the SS actuarial data.

    • Viper_NZ@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      He’s 78. There’s zero chance he makes 98.

      I doubt he’ll make it to the end of his term. He’s not a fit man.

    • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Step 1.5: rot in solitary confinement in the meantime.

      It’s not much, but it’s not nothing either.

    • orcrist@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 month ago

      That’s the plan, but it’s not clear how it’s going to work. There’s a question of why the Supreme Court of the United States would be allowed to address state crimes at all. Most of the time, they aren’t allowed to.

        • orcrist@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          That does seem like a distinct possibility, and I don’t think it would make anything worse. It’s not like he is going to be locked up during the presidency, so if they do anything else to undercut attempts to hold him accountable, it only makes their reputation worse.

          And if the US recovers, after several years or after many years, it’s good to have more information about exactly how f***** up that court was so we know what kinds of things we need to try to prevent from ever happening again. Do we need a constitutional amendment to prevent the court from accepting bribes? How about one that says the president can’t pardon themselves? How about one that says convicted felons can’t run for office? There are all sorts of constitutional amendments that we didn’t know we needed until this court came about. So please, let them deliver more to us, especially if it’s a situation like this where there wasn’t going to be justice anyway.

  • DoucheBagMcSwag@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    45
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    Loophole or not. His AG (likely Cannon) will threaten prison time or charge with treason or insurrection with anyone who attempts to continue any cases against him