Compared to Bush Jr. and others he’s not very effective at mass murder.
It does not say that in the constitution. The language certainly is not clear. You can Google it and the best you will find is it is an open question that has not been adjudicated.
The question you then have to ask is if the supreme court would allow it. I don’t think so for reasons stated.
Bush Jr. was incompetent and lead astray by worse men. Trump is personally responsible. It was literally his decision that knowingly caused the deaths.
Are we counting all deaths or only American deaths?
Well, according to this, trump is better at killing people, and much, MUC better at causing the deaths of Americans.
The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder - Wikipedia.
Bugliosi argues that, under the felony-murder rule, the resulting deaths of over 4,000 American soldiers and 100,000 Iraqi civilians (as of spring 2008) since hostilities began can be charged against Bush as second-degree murder.
I think we’re talking past each other. We seem to be in general agreement, but we interpret Biden’s meaning in different ways.
After you posted your cite and I saw it was dated from last May, I remembered that I saw that press conference live within the entire context of the questioning. What the press was trying to get at was whether Biden would actively direct his DOJ to pursue charges against Trump. Of course that would be wrong for him to do, so he answered as he did.
I think @CairoCarol said how I interpret it very well.
This is phrased in a way to get an emotional response.
If the prosecutor is really sure that he knows the buddy is a murderer, and is also fairly sure they couldn’t convince a jury of said buddy’s guilt, putting the buddy on trial to give buddy the annoyance, and expense, of being tried and acquitted, is wrong, Find some injustice to prosecute where you can do so with legal success, or quit.
Some posts here are mentioning misdeeds of Donald Trump that he would never be tried for (deaths) with the implication, if I understand correctly, that this is a reason to try him for something else.
If Trump is tried, it will be quite hard to find an impartial jury.
I’m glad I don’t live in your world.
You put the person on trial as you should. An unjust outcome is not the prosecutors fault in that case but not putting the person on trial is unjust from the get-go.
If you let Trump skate then the message to all future presidents is go nuts…bribery (involving foreign governments to the detriment of the country), obstruction of justice, election violations…all fine.
That stuff damages the whole nation. We hold absolutely everyone else to these standards. YOU are held to these standards. Why not the president? Why not send a message to future presidents that this is not ok. You will be held accountable. Especially since the damage is so much more egregious than you or I could ever manage doing the same.
No, it is fine if Biden’s AG doesn’t prosecute trump at the federal level- since many states are lining up, and federal pardons wont help there.
Biden can say he rose above such, while privately grinning with glee as the AG of NY takes trump to task.
I think this is a mistake.
A federal prosecution for crimes while committed as president is important. Otherwise Trump just showed all future presidents how to use the office for personal gain.
New York going after him for tax evasion or some shit he did before he was president is not the same thing at all. They should pursue it but it is not the same thing.
The integrity of the presidency is at stake and the NY AG can not fix that.
I’m sure you don’t mean to imply that murdering non-Americans is not a problem.
Nope. I hold Bush and Trump accountable for those.
I’m just unclear what you are counting.
War is hell.
Don’t forget the Puerto Rico electric grid contracts! And whatever else he successfully distracted us from with his constant antics.
As I mentioned in my thread Predictions for the depth of rot that will be found in the Trump Administration, I believe there are things Trump must be prosecuted for. I think that the really heinous stuff is right under the surface and it’s not going to take any kind of witch hunt to find it. It will just be there, out in the open, waiting to be discovered by someone who is going to say “holy shit, that’s the most illegal thing I’ve ever seen!” I have a feeling it will be of such a nature that no amount of discretion could possible excuse it and Trump will spend the rest of his life in jail, branded as a traitor.
Here’s a consideration I don’t think I’ve seen mentioned here yet:
Yes, it might be hard to find an impartial jury. Some 48% of potential jurors would actually vote for this guy. (See: Recent election.) Just try getting 12 jurors to vote to convict.
BUT: There’s a good possibility he could be brought up on civil charges. The New York cases, especially, appear to involve a lot of financial crimes, and those are commonly brought as civil cases. For that you only need 50%+1 of a jury to vote to convict. That’s a lot more plausible.
Are you sure?
I perhaps should first aver than I have lived a legally spotless life and never have got away with anything other than minor traffic violations. But that makes me unusual. Most people have committed crimes and gotten away with it. If every, or most, felonies resulted in jail time, most of us would be jailbirds. (Compare and contrast the school to prison pipeline with how things work in affluent suburbs.)
If that’s too radical a viewpoint for you, surely you realize that most reported crime never results in conviction. with the possible (depends on the jurisdiction) exception of murder. For burglary, or fraud, the best the law can do is show us that violators put themselves at legal risk.
In the case of Donald Trump, this is someone who millions, including some here, have called stupid.Showing that one allegedly stupid high profile crook went to jail (much less, was held civilly liable) won’t do much to deter.
Career prosecutors should do their best to treat DJT as others, in their radar, would be treated. But don’t expect it to scare away a future crooked populist.
This is very simple. Right now the president can use pardons to allow as many people as he likes to break the law with impunity. Do you somehow question that? How is using this Constitutional power on himself any more absurd than that?
Yes.
What you described is people who have not been caught.
Trump has been caught and we are not talking about minor misdemeanors but rather felonies. Serious ones.
So yeah, I suspect you are held to the same standard. You just haven’t committed a felony that we know of yet. If you are, and law enforcement has evidence you committed the felony then I am willing to bet you will be taken to trial for it.
I am amazed at the number of people here arguing to let a felon go. It boggles the mind.
There is a big difference between pardoning other people and pardoning yourself.
Pretend I have the ability to pardon you and tell you to go commit X-crime. I totally promise a pardon is coming if you are arrested.
Now imagine you can pardon yourself. Big difference.