# Delay in prosecution of Trump **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [September 15, 2021, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/delay-in-prosecution-of-trump/950708 "2021-09-15T17:47:51Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![enipla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/54ee81/32.png) [@enipla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/enipla)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2021, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/delay-in-prosecution-of-trump/950708/61 "2021-09-18T15:05:35Z")
> [@Ann\_Hedonia](#): > > 18 USC 599 Promise of political appointment by candidate > 18 USC 600 Promise of employment or other benefit for political activity > 18 USC 601 Deprivation of employment or other benefit for political contribution > 18 USC 606 Intimidation to secure political contributions … No reason to quote all of that. Ann\_Hedonia, love your posts but I think you forgot a few counts of Obstruction of Justice and Extortion. Oh, and he was still President when he asked the Secretary of State of Georgia to ‘find’ him 11,000 votes… Election tampering or interference. ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2021, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/delay-in-prosecution-of-trump/950708/62 "2021-09-20T16:09:39Z")
> [@Buck\_Godot](#): > > This isn’t clear. While its okay under the first amendment for candidate to tell voters who he is going to appoint in order to get them to vote for him, it still isn’t okay for a candidate to [promise a position to someone as part of a quid pro quo exchange for an endorsement](https://www.gawker.com/ben-carson-wanted-to-endorse-someone-else-but-trump-pro-1765003140). I can’t read the cite (some kind of XML error? and the Internet Archive’s wayback machine is offline), do you know which law they were pointing to? ~Max ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2021, 4:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/delay-in-prosecution-of-trump/950708/63 "2021-09-20T16:15:08Z")
18 U.S. Code § 599, presumably. ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2021, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/delay-in-prosecution-of-trump/950708/64 "2021-09-20T16:42:12Z")
Oh, I had presumed some other law was involved. I’ve already shared my opinion that § 599 is unconstitutional. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![Buck\_Godot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/buck_godot/32/6573_2.png) [@Buck\_Godot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Buck_Godot)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2021, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/delay-in-prosecution-of-trump/950708/65 "2021-09-20T20:05:57Z")
Why? The _Brown v. Hartlage_ decision that you pointed to specifically says the campaign promise was OK because it didn’t represent a quid pro quo. [https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/123/brown-v-hartlage](https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/123/brown-v-hartlage) > In this case, Brown had made his promise “openly, subject to the comment and criticism of his political opponent and to the scrutiny of the voters.” His offer scarcely amounted to “a particularized acceptance or a quid pro quo arrangement.” Although the state might fear only those of independent wealth being in a position to seek political office, it must choose acceptable means to avoid such an end. Now admittedly quid pro quo is notoriously hard to prove, so unless there is a secret email or recording of Trump telling Carson he would appoint him as HUD secretary if Carson endorsed him, its unlikely that Trump could be prosecuted, but it doesn’t seem to me that the law is unconstitutional. ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2021, 8:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/delay-in-prosecution-of-trump/950708/66 "2021-09-20T20:09:42Z")
Because there’s only the one statute which doesn’t specify _quid pro quo_, thus it is unconstitutionally overbroad. It would be challenged as unconstitutional before considering the facts of the case (before considering the _quid pro quo_). ~Max ---
**Author:** ![eschereal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschereal/32/18939_2.png) [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2021, 8:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/delay-in-prosecution-of-trump/950708/67 "2021-09-20T20:35:15Z")
> [@PhillyGuy](#): > > Harris would be justified throwing out the registered letter based on the ex post facto law and instead going by one (which I’m sure she would receive from other Georgia authorities) that respects ballot box results. The more likely approach would be to simply invalidate the improperly submitted electoral votes, rather than to substitute others. The votes provided by the wayward state would simply not be included in the overall tally. By such reckoning, the majority needed to win would drop from 270 to 260, as the Georgia would no longer be participating in the election (cf the presidential election of 1864). ---
**Author:** ![Buck\_Godot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/buck_godot/32/6573_2.png) [@Buck\_Godot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Buck_Godot)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2021, 9:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/delay-in-prosecution-of-trump/950708/68 "2021-09-20T21:55:02Z")
I just reread the [statute](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/599) more carefully. The fact that it includes penalties for indirect promises, and penalties even if the perpetrator is unwillful, supports your view that its too broad, and makes we wonder what the writers really had in mind. ---
**Author:** ![jaycat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jaycat/32/3015_2.png) [@jaycat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jaycat)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2021, 10:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/delay-in-prosecution-of-trump/950708/69 "2021-09-20T22:43:02Z")
" As of Mar. 28, there are reportedly two grand juries [considering](https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-unlikely-team-hunting-team-donald-trump-in-georgia)subpoenas for documents relevant to the investigation." Really, almost six months ago? Is this acceptable? ---
**Author:** ![Aspenglow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aspenglow/32/76_2.png) [@Aspenglow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aspenglow)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2021, 11:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/delay-in-prosecution-of-trump/950708/70 "2021-09-20T23:43:42Z")
We’ll definitely be waiting awhile longer, at least for Cy Vance’s case. > **[Trump CFO's lawyer says he suspects more indictments on way](https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-business-new-york-manhattan-indictments-2c0d60c573d288f1fb7731f5d5e170fb)** > > A lawyer for Donald Trump’s indicted corporate finance chief told a judge Monday he has “strong reason to believe” more indictments are coming in an ongoing New York investigation into the former president’s real estate empire. Relevant portion: > Judge Juan Manuel Merchan gave both sides until next spring to file motions and responses. He said he’d decide on motions at a July 12, 2022, hearing, the next time Weisselberg is due in court. > > Merchan said he expected to set a trial date at that time and would likely schedule it for the end of August or beginning of September next year. > > “The reason I mention it now is that it’s on everybody’s radar,” Merchan said. “I don’t have an exact date yet.” Glad the judge made sure to mention it, so as to foreclose any objections about having the trial around the mid-term elections. I don’t think it would apply in any case, since Weisselberg is not a political figure – but that probably wouldn’t stop his attorneys from trying. It also means the judge is unlikely to grant any further continuances except for a really good reason, such as a witness being unavailable due to unforeseeable circumstances (illness, e.g.). Of course, Weisselberg could flip between now and then, especially if any of the contemplated indictments mentioned are against Jack or Barry Weisselberg. Naturally that would be Vance’s preference. ---
**Author:** ![PhillyGuy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ed655f/32.png) [@PhillyGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PhillyGuy)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2021, 1:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/delay-in-prosecution-of-trump/950708/71 "2021-09-21T01:05:31Z")
> [@eschereal](#): > > The more likely approach would be to simply invalidate the improperly submitted electoral votes, rather than to substitute others. That sounds too much like point 3 of the John Eastman plan: > **[eastman.memo.pdf](https://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2021/images/09/20/eastman.memo.pdf)** > > 83.18 KB If a plurality of Pennsylvanians vote for a slate of electors, Harris should resolve any constitutional crisis by accepting said slate. It shouldn’t be thrown out because of an ex post facto law passed by our legislature. There are a lot of potential complexities here. But disenfranchising a state’s voters can’t be the right choice. Now, allowing Trump to run – I think that is reasonable. I am not comfortable with locking up the 2024 GOP frontrunner. Not there is much risk of his losing a jury trial. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2021, 5:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/delay-in-prosecution-of-trump/950708/72 "2021-09-21T05:05:23Z")
Well, if they can’t get trump himself: > **[Longtime GOP operatives charged with funneling Russian national’s money to...](https://www.politico.com/news/2021/09/20/gop-operatives-charged-funneling-russian-money-trump-rnc-513219)** > > Jesse Benton and Doug Wead pleaded not guilty to six felony charges, including facilitating a campaign contribution by a foreign national. _The grand jury indictment alleges that Benton and Wead worked together to accept $100,000 from an unidentified Russian national in order to get the foreigner a meeting with then-candidate Trump at a fundraiser in Philadelphia on Sept. 22, 2016._ _Neither Trump nor his campaign are mentioned by name in the indictment, but details in [the 19-page document](https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/1434226/download) make clear that the scheme involved seeking the donation in connection with the Trump event and an opportunity to get face to face with him._ ---
**Author:** ![Ann\_Hedonia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ann_hedonia/32/319_2.png) [@Ann\_Hedonia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ann_Hedonia)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2021, 1:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/delay-in-prosecution-of-trump/950708/73 "2021-09-21T13:57:33Z")
My biggest question about the Eastman memo is What’s the seventh state? The plot required challenging the electoral slate in _ **seven** _ states. I’m only aware of 6 that were the subject of bullshit disputes. Michigan Pennsylvania Wisconsin Georgia Nevada Arizona It’s still early for me, what am I missing? ---
**Author:** ![Peter\_Morris](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/peter_morris/32/359_2.png) [@Peter\_Morris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peter_Morris)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2021, 2:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/delay-in-prosecution-of-trump/950708/74 "2021-09-21T14:09:28Z")
I think it’s D.C. Not a state, but had 3 EC votes that were disputed. ---
**Author:** ![Peter\_Morris](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/peter_morris/32/359_2.png) [@Peter\_Morris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peter_Morris)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2021, 3:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/delay-in-prosecution-of-trump/950708/75 "2021-09-21T15:14:07Z")
On further research, it turns out that New Mexico is the seventh state. [list here](https://news.yahoo.com/alternative-pro-trump-slates-electors-220255724.html) On reflection, I’m not sure if there _were_ any legal challenges to D.C.'s vote. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2021, 4:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/delay-in-prosecution-of-trump/950708/76 "2021-09-22T04:00:43Z")
Yeah, it is confusing to see the intent, especially… > for the purpose of procuring support in his candidacy Surely that doesn’t mean that a promise of appointing someone in order to get more votes is illegal. After all, every presidential candidate when he or she nominates a vice presidential candidate runs afoul of this law because he is promising to use his or her influence to persuade the national committee to nominate that person. I think the only way to read this to make any sense is that the candidate offers a position to someone for the purpose of procuring _that person’s_ support. IOW, it is fine for Biden to promise he will use his influence to have the DNC nominate Kamala Harris for the purpose of getting more people to vote for him. It is not proper to offer Harris the nomination for the purpose of getting _her_ vote. If the law is interpreted this way, then it only covers quid pro quo scenarios and it saves the constitutionality of the law plus any reason for having it. ---
**Author:** ![dolfinwriter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/779978/32.png) [@dolfinwriter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dolfinwriter)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2021, 12:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/delay-in-prosecution-of-trump/950708/77 "2021-09-23T12:22:14Z")
Gee, I wonder when there will be one of these trackers for Hillary’s crimes, or Bill’s, or Obama’s, or Biden’s? What about other characters who have committed obvious crimes and treason? George Soros? Chuck Todd? Rupert Murdoch? Ted Turner? Brad Raffensperger? Nancy Pelosi? Chuckie Schumer? Kevin McCarthy? Steve Chucri? Bill Gates? (Both of them) Jack Dorsey? Mark Zuckerberg? Sundar Pichai? Eric Swalwell? What would you bet that such pages would not be maintained by and would likely be fought by the same people who maintain this Trump page? ---
**Author:** ![solost](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/solost/32/11776_2.png) [@solost](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/solost)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2021, 12:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/delay-in-prosecution-of-trump/950708/78 "2021-09-23T12:49:04Z")
> [@dolfinwriter](#): > > Gee, I wonder when there will be one of these trackers for Hillary’s crimes, or Bill’s, or Obama’s, or Biden’s? What about…[etc. etc. etc.]… Oh boy, ok, I’ll bite. See, that site I linked to is tracking _ **actual pending litigation** _ of _ **real** _ civil and criminal cases being prosecuted in a court of law. These cases are a matter of public record and as such, information about them in regard to anybody being prosecuted for such crimes is freely available publicly on this, or a number of other online sources. Finding information online about imaginary crimes committed by public figures can certainly also be found online, just not on websites such as the one to which I linked. > [@dolfinwriter](#): > > …Chuck Todd?.. What’s he guilty of…being a bad host of Meet the Press? 🤣 ---
**Author:** ![Red\_Wiggler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/red_wiggler/32/13190_2.png) [@Red\_Wiggler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Red_Wiggler)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2021, 12:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/delay-in-prosecution-of-trump/950708/79 "2021-09-23T12:52:26Z")
There’s nothing stopping anyone from compiling trackers on other people. And how would the Trump tracker compilers “fight” similar compilations? Go on and do it. ---
**Author:** ![dolfinwriter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/779978/32.png) [@dolfinwriter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dolfinwriter)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2021, 1:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/delay-in-prosecution-of-trump/950708/80 "2021-09-23T13:03:11Z")
> [@solost](#): > > What’s he guilty of…being a bad host of Meet the Press? Hide and watch [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/delay-in-prosecution-of-trump/950708.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/delay-in-prosecution-of-trump/950708.md?page=5)