Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

What does the future hold for Donald Trump? - threadbans in OP

Options
1106910701072107410751190

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,819 ✭✭✭aidanodr


    The USA Constitution with its "Checks and Balances" getting ripped up and chucked out the window by Trump.

    Meanwhile all others standing around with that human flaw of .. Oh my god he wouldnt do that .. would he



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,710 ✭✭✭✭briany


    Trump's first criminal trial is due to begin, what, next month? If he's found guilty, there, then that'll be another unprecedented situation where a top candidate for the US presidency is campaigning under a criminal conviction. That would be the test. If he doesn't lose popularity or isn't handed a sentence, then any subsequent trials amount to free publicity.



  • Registered Users Posts: 82,407 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    IL removes Trump from ballot for insurrection clause




  • Registered Users Posts: 82,407 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    "45 days [for SCOTUS to act] when a ruling could hurt Trump, but 130 days when a ruling - the delay, can help Trump. This is the essence of this Supreme Court."




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 10,861 ✭✭✭✭martingriff


    Has it do not see them ruled in favour yet and no way in he'll they will as this thread has said time and time again. No chance of him winning anyway



  • Registered Users Posts: 82,407 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    They appear to be providing a delay which may ensure he never sees a trial. Provided he wins the election in November, or Haley does.




  • Registered Users Posts: 19,401 ✭✭✭✭everlast75




  • Registered Users Posts: 82,407 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    As cathartic as that would be, the reality is SCOTUS will probably just take its sweet time affirming what the lower court already crossed every t and dotted every i of. The idea that SCOTUS would immunize POTUS to you know, assassinate them, and the Congress, universally unlikely result of this hearing. I wager it's about the delay though, dressed up as bs reasoning for getting involved instead of just perfunctorily refusing to hear the case with the finite time SCOTUS has each session, to waste time on a ruling that is all but foregone. As some court watchers pointed out too they don't even necessarily have to issue a decision this session they could wait till the last day and say 'yknow, we just don't know, we need more evidence and an evidentiary hearing' and push it back to next judicial session, which starts in October, and then still take their sweet time with it. But they want to be thorough you see, because they don't want anyone to think they are deliberately wasting anyone's time...

    ...When simply refusing to challenge the lower court's ruling would have sufficed.



  • Registered Users Posts: 19,401 ✭✭✭✭everlast75


    My tongue was firmly in my cheek for sure.


    Yep, that's exactly what SCOTUS are doing.


    Leaving Bragg's case, universally acknowledged as the weakest case, with the potential of Trump defeating it, resulting in him spewing how not just that case, but all the cases are invalid.

    Infuriating.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 82,407 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Interestingly according to a segment here the court is only hearing a portion of the lower case, a part of the case dealing with Double Jeopardy. Trump claims Impeachment Two was his first prosecution for January 6 so therefore he’s not allowed to be prosecuted again.

    I don’t personally see it flying.

    "No person shall . . . be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb . . . . "

    Impeachment from federal office doesn’t put defendants in jeopardy of ‘life or limb.’ The meaning of this seems quite plain to me. Impeachment only involves jeopardy of removal from office and being barred from holding future office. It’s even more bizarre when you factor that the whole Seal Team Six argument from his lawyers was that in order to be prosecuted for such an assassination they alleged the president would have to be “swiftly impeached” and THEN a prosecution could occur so they’re just throwing **** at the wall




  • Registered Users Posts: 1,287 ✭✭✭Raoul Duke III


    Trump has had a very good week so far unfortunately:

    • walloped Haley in SC and Michigan
    • The SC has taken up his immunity claim which basically torpedoes his most serious criminal case until post-election
    • Solidified even further his control over the RNC
    • Mitch McConnell stepping down, no doubt to be replaced by a proper ring-kisser

    Maybe the Stormy Daniels trial will be the next speed bump for him.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 15,454 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    It's all about the delay.

    They wont find that he has immunity ,but all the back and forth will mean that the Smith case wont' start until August/September and won't be decided before the Election.

    They are giving him every shot at avoiding this without actually ruling in his favour.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,287 ✭✭✭Raoul Duke III


    Yes, that's the reality.


    The one thing I really don't get is why the DoJ had to wait until 2023 to bring the indictments. Surely they could, and should, have gotten ahead of the political calendar and given themselves space to head off all the Trump delay tactics.

    Of course no-one could have foreseen the Georgia prosecutors going all amateur hour with their personal relationships screwing up the case down there!



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,329 ✭✭✭ronjo


    Do you really think that badly underperforming the polls in Michigan (i dont know about SC) can be considered net positive for him?



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,287 ✭✭✭Raoul Duke III


    Winning 70-30 in a contested primary? That's a landslide. So yes, net positive.

    Trump doesn't need to expend any more energy or political capital on the primary at this point, he's a lock, it's done. He can start campaigning in the general right now - and is.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,329 ✭✭✭ronjo


    Not when the polls were suggesting more so I disagree.



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,710 ✭✭✭✭briany


    I'm guessing that the US DoJ wanted to really get its ducks in a row in terms of prosecuting Trump. The criminal cases against Trump seem like total slam dunks but the semantic and technical defenses Trump's representation would use have to be taken into consideration, and so all evidence and testimony must be watertight. That takes time to gather.

    The hush money trial is set to begin late next month. I read that it's a Class E felony under the US system, which can carry various sentences upon conviction but prison time is certainly one of those. If he's convicted, there, then he's officially a criminal. Whatever else he might be convicted of from that point on would really just be degrees of the thing. All these people who said they'd change their mind about him if convicted of a crime, they may get an opportunity to do that before the Summer is out.

    @Quin_Dub

    It's all about the delay.

    They wont find that he has immunity ,but all the back and forth will mean that the Smith case wont' start until August/September and won't be decided before the Election.

    They are giving him every shot at avoiding this without actually ruling in his favour.

    Yes, but what aspect of the opinion were Trump's legal team able to challenge, such that the US Supreme Court decided to actually hear the case? I've heard news pundits saying the legal opinion of the DC Court was watertight.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,594 ✭✭✭Hande hoche!


    One theory is that they still want Trump to be the GOP nominee as Biden has beaten him once already. If they proceeded in 2022, they may have had DeSantis or Haley as his opponent in November. Think it was one of the DeSantis campaign (in fairness there were a lot) that claimed the various indictments sucked the oxygen out of the contest.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 15,454 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    I don't think that they have said what aspect they think needs further review and they don't have to.

    The case won't be heard until the very end of April, they'll take a week or two for hearings, then they'll disappear for at least a month or more to "deliberate" so it will be late June or perhaps later before we get an actual decision . Which means even with everybody moving at top speed, the earliest trial date will be some time in August when early voting will be starting.

    It also brings things inside the DOJs own self-imposed 90 day window prior to an election when they try not do "unduly impact" elections.

    This is the absolute best possible outcome for Trump here.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 4,250 ✭✭✭EltonJohn69


    I wonder who will replace Mitch ? If Trump gets in will he just decide to change the laws and maybe put Don jr. in ? He did say he was going full dictator from day one



  • Registered Users Posts: 769 ✭✭✭MICKEYG


    You are confusing the DOJ with the Democrat Party. They are independent of each other despite what soem here would say.



  • Registered Users Posts: 794 ✭✭✭bog master


    Interesting point made on CNN last night re:DOJ and 90 day window. It has been an unofficial rule not to set up/announce an investigation or indict immediately prior to the election, but the pundit said it does not necessarily apply if the indictment has been made.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,287 ✭✭✭Raoul Duke III


    Trump has unique vulnerabilities to be sure. I doubt we have ever in our lifetimes seen such a polarizing figure.

    But....but...but....all those things were true in 2016 and he won. They were true in 2020 (at which point voters knew what an awful president he was) and he got 74m votes.

    So we shouldn't be complacent or dismissive. And he's running against Biden, who has terrible, indeed historically awful, favourability ratings and indeed faces his owns unique challenges. Right now, the election is 50/50 (if you want to bet on it, you can back Trump at evens and Biden at 9/4, so the betting markets have a clear opinion). So Trump can definitely win - we shouldn't let our distaste for him blind us to that.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 15,454 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    All depends on the outcome of the election.

    If Trump wins then he'll want an absolute zealot in charge who will do exactly what he wants , but not someone with their own ambitions, so not Ted Cruz.

    Someone like Ron Johnson or maybe Lindsey Graham perhaps.

    That's even more important if the Democrats hold on to the Senate but lose the WH.

    If Trump loses but the GOP win the Senate then it gets interesting , do they try to break free of him or do they still go MAGA??

    If they lose WH and Senate races then who knows what direction they'll go - Probably lean back towards "normal" , relatively speaking.

    The House is a lost cause for now as regardless of whether they are in the majority or not there will be enough nutters there to ensure that MAGA lives on with or without Trump.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,287 ✭✭✭Raoul Duke III


    I don't think the legalities actually matter (and given the terrible track record of Trump's lawyers to date, I have little doubt he will lose at the SC). The politics is what actually matters i.e. delaying the trial until after the election.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,503 ✭✭✭tobefrank321


    There's a small chance the election will be fought between Nicki Haley and Michelle Obama yet! Just a small chance.



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,450 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose




  • Registered Users Posts: 1,287 ✭✭✭Raoul Duke III


    Yes, and Scarlett Johansson might take me out on a date tonight. 🤔



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 15,589 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    What poster here has dismissed Trump's winning? I don't recall anyone. However, what people rightly point out is that Trump has been effectively campaigning for the last 3 years and yet still faces a not insignificant portion of his party (40% in the last primary) that doesn't want him.

    Of course, the vast majority of those will vote for him as the GOP nominee, but it raises the question as to how he is going to win over independents, and those who opted to vote for Biden last time when he couldn't convince his party.

    And yes, Trump got 74m votes, but lost by something like 7m. What has he done to get those voters on his side? Nothing. The only play they seem to have is that Biden is terrible. But al that does it then get people to try to work out which is the least bad option.

    And any independent or critical thinker can see that whatever faults Biden may have, they are nothing compared to the faults that Trump has.

    And therein lies the real problem for Trump. He won in 2016 based largely on a desire for something new (which he isn't anymore) and a huge amount of anti-HC sentiment. While Biden may not be popular, he is not the divisive figure that HC was. In fact, Trump has now taken on that mantle.

    The recent results seem to suggest that the polls are overestimating the support for Trump.



This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement