William henry harrison did nothing wrong.Hey I'm not against locking up all the other former presidents too if that's what it takes.
William henry harrison did nothing wrong.Hey I'm not against locking up all the other former presidents too if that's what it takes.
The question is less "don't charge Trump, or you have to try everyone else, too" (my former comment notwithstanding) and more "is the crime you're talking about really WORTH all that fuss?" Mere possession of documents has been (historically) deemed not to be "worth all that fuss," whereas Trump's efforts to HIDE documents, to LIE ABOUT having them, and to actively OBSTRUCT the retrieval of them, put him in a category we've hardly ever seen a president nor former president accused of.Yeah, whenever they try to argue that presidents need immunity or else Obama might be charged for drone strikes, etc. my answer is usually: "Don't threaten me with a good time."
I think you're emphasizing a distinction that no one has actually disputed. No one said said he should have been arrested for "mere possession".The question is less "don't charge Trump, or you have to try everyone else, too" (my former comment notwithstanding) and more "is the crime you're talking about really WORTH all that fuss?" Mere possession of documents has been (historically) deemed not to be "worth all that fuss," whereas Trump's efforts to HIDE documents, to LIE ABOUT having them, and to actively OBSTRUCT the retrieval of them, put him in a category we've hardly ever seen a president nor former president accused of.
www.dailykos.com
It's less that he disputed the point, but I felt that Wonko's assertion in post #2,222 was too generic about the crime for which he was advocating Trump's imprisonment, and I think that being too generic on this point is actively dangerous. Let's not give our opponents fuel to accuse of advocating for punishment for one side only, and not for our own. There's far too much of that around as it is.I think you're emphasizing a distinction that no one has actually disputed. No one said said he should have been arrested for "mere possession".
"When they actually found and removed all those top secret documents" was after the attempts to obstruct.
The judge is limited on New York statutes for that crime. His only options are a $1000 fine OR "up to" 30 days in jail per offense.Apparently the NEXT ONE ends in jail time.
Or, it's supposed to. I doubt it will, but hey, they can really bump up the volume of the cash fine.
I doubt they'll do that either.
Some of the material I've seen (through the meidas touch network. Always state your sources.) seem to state that it could 1000 bucks a pop, or 150K a pop if the lesser fee doesn't dissuade, OR up to 30 days in jail per offence.The judge is limited on New York statutes for that crime. His only options are a $1000 fine OR "up to" 30 days in jail per offense.
And it has already been addressed the logistical and political issues surrounding sending Donald Trump to jail...but it feels like Trump is just going to keep pushing until the judge is left with no option since, for someone of Trump's wealth, the fines ain't doin' jive.