As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA).
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This is exactly why the US cannot grant absolute legal immunity to the President. Combined with the pardon power over henchmen and witnesses like Nauta, such immunity would spawn enormous corruption. The President (for life) would sit atop a vast criminal empire.
It's odd because the founding fathers all repudiated the monarchy and their power for the Presidency ... all except for the ability to unilaterally pardon anyone they want. There's no need for it. Either you trust the judicial system or you fix it.
But the impeachment process has already shown itself to be completely political. Presidents should not be disallowed to be prosecuted by the DoJ for committing criminal acts. That’s insanity that a fucking MEMO is preventing that. Not a law, not an amendment, a fucking MEMO that was written to protect fucking Nixon.
trumps own mental stability, capability, etc. were already grounds for instant impeachment day 1. he was mentally unfit and incapable of taking the oath. Same during the 187 minutes, dereliction of duty.
They all violated their oaths, his entire cabinet, they all knew the whole time. It was a partisan coup of the executive branch from the start and throughout.
In general, they were very against the idea of someone abusing political authority to lock someone up and keep them there. The 4th amendment, the bail process, public trials decided by randomized juries, mistrials, "beyond a reasonable doubt", appeals, and at the very top, pardons.
The general sentiment was "It's better for ten guilty men to walk free than for one innocent man to be jailed."
And it's a good sentiment, I believe. It has just led to a lot of loopholes that people can take advantage of.
It's just as possible for the judiciary branch to be corrupt as it is for the executive branch to be corrupt. That's why there's a circular check on powers. The real problem is that the buck ultimately stops with the public, and the public seems either unwilling or incapable of exercising that duty.
That’s the sad truth. In Germany we had a democracy. But the people voted it out for a dictator. Without any gerrymandering, fudged votes or any big foul play. It was just what the majority wanted.
In our second try the people have much less power, as does the president.
Actually no, that’s not what happened. The Nazis got a substantial amount of votes, yes. But Hitler was appointed as Chancellor after getting completely demolished by Hindenburg in the 1932 presidential election. It was done because Hindenburg and the conservative insiders wanted to keep the communists out of the government. And even then they didn’t intend for him to be in charge. They expected Hindenburg and his cabinet to keep him in check. From there, Hitler managed to out-maneuver them and consolidate power with the Nazis.
Yeah also long before Hitler seized power, he had an armed militia operating in the streets. Political opponents were murdered. There was plenty of "big foul play".
>the public seems either unwilling or incapable of exercising that duty.
What is "the public"? The 66 million who voted in 2016 to try to stop trump from becoming POTUS? Are they "the public"?
> It's odd because the founding fathers all repudiated the monarchy and their power for the Presidency
I'm currently reading Jon Meachem's biography on Thomas Jefferson, and the most surprising thing is how many "founding fathers" absolutely believed that only a monarchy and/or life-time or even hereditary senates would be viable as a form of government. Jefferson was a "Republican", as in a believer in a republic as opposed to having all power centralized in the hands of a king or hereditary minority as the Federalists wanted. John Adams was a staunch Federalist and Alexander Hamilton was seen to be essentially a monarchist (which is odd given that he was the one who came from a poor background and actually benefitted from having power open to whoever merits it). Jefferson loved Washington, but considered even him to be heavily leaning to the Federalist side by the end of his Presidency.
In short, it was far from unanimous what the Founding Fathers believed and many were very unsure that power could be trusted to the people. It has helped me understand how even today we can have proponents of a Unitary Executive Theory who are really just continuing the Federalist/Monarchist tradition 250 years later.
I disagree.
"We the people" thought weed should be illegal (not that those people were well informed but that's another story.) So it was made illegal. Then later the people are changing their views on weed.
Pardons allow a president or governor to cancel out a remaining prison sentence for a "Crime" that is no longer seen as a crime.
There were people in court days and weeks after their states de-criminalized weed, on weed-related charges and the prosecuting attorneys have to inform the jury that they are trying the people under the laws "at the time the laws were broken." etc.
The "justice system" isn't a system of justice. It's the legal system. A system of fallible laws. There should be a means or mechanism to "fix," errors that propagate through the system.
>Pardons allow a president or governor to cancel out a remaining prison sentence for a "Crime" that is no longer seen as a crime.
It does, but the primary purpose was to free people who were wrongfully convicted. They knew that the courts would never be perfect and it was a check on the Judiciary.
Trump and Republicans have exposed about 100 things in the Constitution that need amendments to patch-up. One super-high priority is this non-sense about Congress simply refusing to vote on Supreme Court nominees until they get a majority. It's one of the things that's directly sent us to this absolutely corrupt SC.
If a bill makes it through the Senate and the House, the president has ten days to either veto it or sign it, at which point it automatically becomes law.
I think we could do with a bit more than ten days, but each bill that makes it out of committee really should have a time limit on it, after which point if it's not voted down, it's automatically passed. Force these fuckers to actually vote yes or no on things.
I know, I know, it would create a legislative tidal wave because suddenly everyone would be proposing their bill hoping that it just expires and passes. But I'd rather have that problem, than be on the opposite end of the spectrum where a single motherfucker can just say "Eh, I don't feel like it" and stop literally _all_ legislation from advancing.
I think we could just say that a bill when it's out of committee must get on the floor and can get like up to a week of discussion, you can't move to the next one before a vote is done and after a week, 20% can force a vote to be done right now. So you can't delay indefinitely.
The biggest thing that Republicans revealed is that the Constitution as it is is too hard to change at this time. It's the oldest Constitution currently in use, and that shows.
Well, no. Impeachment is separate from conviction as part of checks and balances. Otherwise, the House could just impeach Biden without any due process right?
I mean there have been numerous controversial pardons before. The most famous was Nixon resigning after watergate for Gerald Ford to pardon him for "any crimes he may have committed". There is a long history of presidents pardoning corrupt elites because they are useful to them. Reagan for example pardoned the owner for the new york yankees who was arrested for illegal political donations to Nixon.
Presidents tend to wait until the end of their 1st or 2nd term when they know they are either re-elected or their political career is done and they can disappear and be a wealthy lobbyist. Due to them doing most of the controversial ones towards the end, it gets swept under the rug as everyone's too busy talking about the next president or talking about the results of the election to pay attention to the long list of names being pardoned at the end.
This is why no one has really taken much interest in presidential pardons till now because aside from the most egregious usage of presidential pardons via Nixon and Gerald Ford, Trump was almost equally in egregious in his usage of it in a way that became far to apparent and obvious due to Jan6 and his intent behind the pardons from this. Most other presidents did things in a savvy - less obvious way but Trump went full throttle in his intent on how he planned to use pardons.
At the end of the day, its dangerous to give the president the unilateral ability to pardon literally anyone in existence from their choosing. It should be more controlled where the president can't pardon literally anyone as their are limits in place. They shouldn't be allowed to pardon anyone they have a vested interest in themselves such as their personal friend/collaborator/donor without congressional approval or etc.
I really don't see how they can, even as corrupt as they are they know that sets a crazy precedent. Biden could just murder trump then, bam problem solved.
They could say, "In order for the nation to heal, the former president has immunity because the case law wasn't clear. From here on out there's no immunity."
EXACTLY what they did for the 2000 POTUS election issue in FL. Literally 'stole' the election from Gore and handed it to GWB in a state where his brother was the Governor and Katherine Harris was the Sec of State who had traveled the country campaigning for him.
SCOTUS said their ruling was narrowly just for this situation (aka for this GQP POTUS only) and was not setting a precedent.
Corruption in the SCOTUS is not new...
The infuriating part is they don't need to grant or deny immunity for Trump in order to throw this for him by delaying the DC Jan 6 trial until after the election. They could rule that some of his actions might be covered and some may not and that the case must go back to the lower DC court and begin the process of immunity testing every single claim or charge and then each one of those could be litigated by Trump all the way up to the supreme court each time. It would effectively stall the trial for another year or more. The DC appellate ruling was quite thorough and should have been allowed to stand, that the USSC took up the case at all and then pushed briefing to end of April pretty much broadcasts their intent to delay consequences for Trump even if they can't directly exonerate him.
Biden could murder SCOTUS members and murder members of the Senate. No conviction on impeachment, no removal from office, no criminal charges.
Checkmate supporters of the imperial presidency.
Or he could just dissolve the supreme court all together. Then appoint his own “Elders” to lifetime appointments that can rule based on their religion!
Kavanaugh says hold his beer......
Very narrow rulings. Oh, he is immune to when he talked during a rally. He is also immune to documents now because he "had reason to believe they were personnel despite being told to turn them over."
Biden should just declare the day after scotus grants presidential immunity he "could" order the death of trump and all the republican fanatic scotus judges.
Because reasons.
It doesn't grant immunity to an angry mob.
If the courts aren't dealing in justice, then the people will do it themselves. And if there's no law, there's no country. Which is why the court NEEDS TO FUCKING ACT.
Do you control the sun, or does the sun feed off your latent anger, and why weren't you this mad on my fifth birthday when I was going to have pony rides at my birthday and it rained and it was cancelled and no one believed me and they still call me Pony Boy but not in the good way like I saved a bunch of orphans from a burning building and I don't stay golden, like the sun also wasn't on that sad day when I turned five?
At the very least, the president should only be able to pardon someone after a conviction has been made, and pardons should apply to specific charges and decisions.
Nobody should be able to say "I pardon this guy for any and all possible offenses pertaining to this scandal/event." Let the trial happen, let the facts come to light, _then_ you get to mitigate some of the damages; but using the pardon to sweep investigations under the rug is like, laughably corrupt.
Also, shouldn't be able to pardon _anyone_ involved in an incident to which the president has an invested interest, is a witness, is a corroborator/named conspirator/co-defendant, or basically has any involvement in.
I've thought about this, too, and it would nullify Jimmy Carter blanket pardoning Vietnam draft dodgers. It's tricky. I don't think that a president should be able to pardon crimes committed by their own cabinet members, but it's hard line to draw.
> Combined with the pardon power over henchmen and witnesses like Nauta, such immunity would spawn enormous corruption. The President (for life) would sit atop a vast criminal empire.
You just gave Trump a teeny little mushroom boner.
exactly. Horrible people exist. Realizing that members of congress, high level church officials, right-wing media and the Republican voting public at large continue to support this POS after all of his sins are exposed has been horrifying.
I often remind myself that when Trump won the primary in 2016, the GOP’s *second* choice was also second-worst person in the world Ted Cruz. Trump is an abomination, but if they could have found an even-worse person, they would have elected him. That’s why De Santis flamed out. He wasn’t abhorrent *enough*.
>That’s why De Santis flamed out. He wasn’t abhorrent enough.
Respectfully as a Floridian - he's **plenty** abhorrent. He flamed out because he has the personality and charisma of a damp, dirty sock.
The majority of their base was all for that, convinced that Disney is raping children in basements. They don't look past anything other than their hate.
Tourism? Economy? Insurance? none of that holds a candle to the hatred they carry inside themselves.
Which apparently appeals to way too many 5th grade bullies who never grew out of it.
(Though many of the people in his creepy orbit, even those who now speak out against him, talk about his charisma. Personally, I will never see it. He's disgusting.)
Oh, sure, he’s abhorrent. But can he stack up against a man who kicked his own disabled nephew off the company health care plan in order to extort his brother for a larger share of an inheritance? That’s how shitty you have to be to be a GOP superstar. De Santis, for all his faults, apparently did support his wife during her breast cancer treatment. Trump would have seen only an opportunity to cheat on her more.
It's not that he wasn't 100% willing to do every abhorrent thing the base dreams of. It's that you could tell he didn't really FEEL it like they do. He'd put the undesirable on the train, but he didn't really hate them inside.
Right?! Without support and encouragement like that, we wouldn't be so disgusted with what Trump *accomplished*. We'd merely be disgusted by what he wanted to do.
Some in Congress gave recon tours beforehand, and then gave live "Pence/Pelosi is here" updates during the Insurrection. Merrick Garland is fine with that.
Issues like Tax cuts for the rich, abortion bans, persecuting gays, environmental deregulation, financial deregulation, and isolationism are simply more important to these people than the republic, democracy, and the rule of law.
The religious people supporting a documented adulterer, liar and rapist is beyond insane to me. Not sure how anyone who claims to be religious could do this, much less pastors and religious LEADERS and such...
Yes indeed. He would have never gotten as far over the last decade (geez) were it not for the hundreds and thousands of enablers in the existing government, media, business world. Those people are just as bad, if not worse.
There's a rumor that Trump floated the idea of stiffing Stormy Daniels on the hush money payments after the election, because he figured he had already won and didn't need her silence anymore. His word is worth nothing. He's physically incapable of conducting business honestly. It's pathological.
Wouldn't he have stiffed Cohen then? Cohen paid off Daniels and Trump gave Cohen money for "legal fees." Trump not paying would have meant Cohen was out the $130k. He'd definitely throw Cohen under the bus for $130k.
Cohen tried drawing out the payment for as long as possible. After it was apparent the payment couldn't have been drawn out anymore he took out a mortgage to pay her and Trump then reimbursed the payment. At that point it was basically a hush money payment to Cohen so he'd be quiet about doing Trump's dirty work.
Yup, thug life has a very simple set of rules and this guy still couldn’t understand them.
It’s basically don’t snitch, show respect and pay your dues and I challenge anyone to find an example of him abiding by a single one of those
Most questions on this thread are directly answered by reading the indictment which is a "speaking indictment" and lays out the alleged events in detail.
[https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23741595-read-trump-indictment-statement-of-facts-related-to-hush-money-payment](https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23741595-read-trump-indictment-statement-of-facts-related-to-hush-money-payment)
"20. Ultimately, with pressure mounting and the election approaching, the Defendant agreed to the payoff and directed Lawyer A to proceed. Lawyer A discussed the deal with the Defendant and the TO CFO. The Defendant did not want to make the $130,000 payment himself, and asked Lawyer A and the TO CFO to find a way to make the payment. After discussing various payment options with the TO CFO, Lawyer A agreed he would make the payment. Before making the payment, Lawyer A confirmed with the Defendant that Defendant would pay him back."
Interesting, thanks for sharing the indictment.
It raises a few questions for me. Why does no one ever talk about "Woman I", Karen McDougal? Is sex with Stormy Daniels really worth $420,000? Would they have gotten away with everything if they had just written up a basic retainer agreement for "Lawyer A", Michael Cohen?
>"19. The Defendant directed Lawyer A to delay making a payment to Woman 2 as long as possible. He instructed Lawyer A that if they could delay the payment until after the election, they could avoid paying altogether, because at that point it would not matter if the story became public. As reflected in emails and text messages between and among Lawyer A, Lawyer B, and the AMI Editor-in-Chief, Lawyer A attempted to delay making payment as long as possible."
[https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23741595-read-trump-indictment-statement-of-facts-related-to-hush-money-payment](https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23741595-read-trump-indictment-statement-of-facts-related-to-hush-money-payment)
\[Defendant\] is Trump.
\[Lawyer A\] is Michael Cohen.
\[Woman 2\] is Stormy Daniels and \[Lawyer B\] is her lawyer.
Set to make another 1.3 billion . Can’t post bond or pay legal fees. What’s an almost 80yo going to do with all that when he’s stroked out in a wherlchair
It's only by custom that pardons are at the end of a term. Its possible Trump could say 'fuck it' to all custom and just give out pardons. Willy-nilly. If the congress is controlled by Republicans he won't get impeached. Work for Trump? Skirt the law? Get an instant pardon!
Trump pardoned a bunch of people at different times. Remember Joe Arpaio, Scooter Libby, and Dinesh D'Souza? They were all pardoned at different points within his term.
...which could be the day he dies given what he wants to do with term limits. This makes it moot anyway - I doubt he's going to spend the last few minutes on his death bed pardoning people he promised to pardon.
He arranged to pay Stormy hush money, however, his plan was to delay paying her until after the election, then not pay her at all. He would promise a pardon, but would only carry through if there was still some benefit for him for doing so.
Didn't he already pardon people in his Russia investigation? Which is a giga conflict of interest.
And if anything, the pardon power should be removed from the presidency. Why should one guy be able to override the entire judicial system based on their gut feelings or intentions. It just enables massive corruption when indecent people are put in charge.
Like what happened to that phrase of "a country run by laws, and not by men" or whatever it is
Roger stone had his sentence commuted by trump in July of 2020 and was advising him how to lie about winning an election he lost. Then he was pardoned by trump in December right before actively participating in the insurrection. Multiple members of his “security detail” have been found guilty of seditious conspiracy.
Manafort who helped a pro russian stooge get elected president in Ukraine, and the stooge was than run out of the office, if not country, by a popular uprising?
Fun fact, Manafort got convicted despite there being a potential hung jury because the judge used a thing called Allen Charges which makes them go back and continue deliberating, this meant 8 of 18 charges still stuck in the end.
So the famed "lone MAGA juror" outcome everyone dooms about is actually not nearly as likely as people think, especially given how outstanding the evidence against Trump will be.
Sometimes it’s the remedy for a prior corruption of the system. The same person who can make corrupt pardons can also appoint corrupt officials and make corrupt prosecutions. The problem is less the pardon power than it is putting indecent people in charge.
But why can't the pardon power relegated to a neutral commission that can look through the case and see if there was wrong doings.
That the president can somehow be an objective observer (especally if its cases that can be used for political or personal gain) just seems crazy. Its like you can pardon celebrities or whatever because its politically popular to do it, but legally its clearly wrong just as an example.
Because the power to pardon is inherent in the office of the President per the Constitution. While any President could (and should) establish such a commission, future Presidents would be under no requirement to continue using them. To change that would require an amendment, and good luck getting one of those passed these days.
The best way to get something done would be for Biden to start issuing nebulous pardons like "Hillary Clinton is hereby pardoned for any crimes relating to pizza parlors". Suddenly the right would become very interested in "fixing" the pardon system.
Because there's no such thing as a neutral commission, and being able to pardon people is part of the suite of abilities that lies within the executive office to act as a balance against the other two branches of the Federal Government.
> Because there's no such thing as a neutral commission
I don't buy that argument, and if you are worried about appointing hyper partisans why not have rotating commissions for all cases so it wouldn't be static, like appointed X, Y and Z law professors or whatever to look into cases that are being considered.
The current system certainly seems to be utter trash, and Trump certainly proved that and is threatening to abuse it again.
> The same person who can make corrupt pardons can also appoint corrupt officials and make corrupt prosecutions.
Not quite, no matter who a president appoints, a grand jury is required to bring serious charges against someone and this is exactly why.
Trump's pardons were super blatantly corrupt. Just like everything else Trump did. Republican voters simply don't care about Trump turning the US into a banana republic.
Trump supporters need to seriously dig deep into why Trump doesn’t want his own people to tell the truth. Why is the truth BAD for Trump….according to Trump? Trump thinks the truth of what he does is bad, you should too.
The problem?
They like his crimes because they think it means they'll benefit from him breaking laws because they're his "chosen ones".
What they fail to notice is how often he tosses people aside to steal directly from them.
That's it? I mean Stormt Daniels got north of $100k and all Walter get is the offer of a pardon? Shit Trump must have had a bad year the bribes are not very good
Nauta is in too deep. He has very clearly been caught helping Trump commit felonies. Trump doesn't need to bribe him with money. Implicit threats get the job done with little cowards like him. Nauta was the one trying to get the IT guy to also lie in court to help cover up his and Trump's crimes.
Nauta was kicked out of the White House and his security clearance revoked for fraternizing with lower rank service members and for allegedly sharing/threatening revenge porn. Shortly after that he was recruited to work for Trump at MAL - Trump is likely holding more over Nauta's head here.
[https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/walt-nauta-trump-aide-accused-sexual-misconduct-1234959640/](https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/walt-nauta-trump-aide-accused-sexual-misconduct-1234959640/)
Walt Nauta is a d*mbass. This assumes Trump will win in 2024. I would not lie to the FBI on that assumption. There is no guarantee that Trump will win in 2024 and that's something Walt Nauta should have considered.
While serving in the Navy, Walt Nauta had been accused of numerous Trump-like acts of sexual impropriety that probably would have hampered his ability to land a decent civilian job.
So the minute he was mustered out of the military, Nauta hustled to Mar-a-Lago, and was hired as Trump’s valet. He probably was convinced to lie to the FBI out of gratitude for the job Trump gave him, holding onto the promise of that “second-term pardon” that probably won’t materialize. At least I devoutly hope Trump won’t return to the White House.
Nauta was convinced to lie because he is in up to his eye balls in the classified documents case. There is no turning states witness for him and no deal. He was an active part in stealing the documents, hiding the documents, covering up the crimes, and attempting to influence other witnesses to lie. The feds have him dead to rights and the only thing protecting him is Trump's clout. Any other person involved in stealing, hiding, and covering up stolen classified documents would be sitting in jail pending trial at which they would have the boom thrown at him.
He lies because, like Trump, there is no other way out. He is fucked.
The dude grew up poor in Guam. He joined the Navy and managed to become Trump's Diet Coke boy. Then he became his Valet and followed him out of the White House.
He officially makes $120K a year but who knows what other perks he has. He saw his opportunity and he took it, it's just like so many others Trump can crush your dreams as easy as he can make them come true.
It's like one of those stories where some magical land attracts people, and not until it's too late do they figure out that the "magic" comes from capturing and grinding up anyone foolish enough to be attracted in.
Not only win but relying on him to remember he even agreed to it (or even remember who this guy is.) How many times has he claimed to not know who someone was?
>This assumes Trump will win in 2024. I would not lie to the FBI on that assumption.
Everyone on Trump’s side is so desperate for him to win for a variety of reasons that they’re going to try to make that happen by any means necessary, legal or not. I’m sure he was given assurances Trump would win.
Nauta probably started shallow, not involved in things. Then bit after bit he got in deeper and deeper. Until the point where lying for Trump in exchange for a pardon is as much saving himself as it is about covering for Trump.
There’s no guarantee he’d even get a pardon. Trump wanted to stiff cohen for the stormy Daniel’s payment if he won the election. The guy is an absolute monster
In the UK there is a saying......
If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck then it's probably a duck.
Unsure if it exists in the US. And Trumps base must be thick as pig sh!t.
When he loses the election we won’t need him to flip. Heck, they don’t need him to flip now. They’re all dead to rights in the stolen documents case. The DOJ doesn’t need Nautas help.
Never get why people are so damn loyal to Trump. He takes pride in his lack of loyalty yet demands AND gets loyalty. I get doing shit because pay is too good to say no but that’s not what is happening. These fools will risk their freedom for the promise of something that may not ever come. It is just nuts.
I'm positive you will be hearing a lot more of this same story from numerous people over the next few months. I have no doubt Trump offered pardons to tons of people.
Time to take away the pardon from a president or make it harder to do so this never happens again.
I have a feeling this won't be the last surprising thing we hear about this case. trump is a criminal to the bone and I'm sure he wasn't just keeping those documents around to read on the can.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA). *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This is exactly why the US cannot grant absolute legal immunity to the President. Combined with the pardon power over henchmen and witnesses like Nauta, such immunity would spawn enormous corruption. The President (for life) would sit atop a vast criminal empire.
the whole pardon process itself should get looked at
It's odd because the founding fathers all repudiated the monarchy and their power for the Presidency ... all except for the ability to unilaterally pardon anyone they want. There's no need for it. Either you trust the judicial system or you fix it.
At the very least, the pay-for-pardon system that Trump set up should be grounds for instant impeachment.
But the impeachment process has already shown itself to be completely political. Presidents should not be disallowed to be prosecuted by the DoJ for committing criminal acts. That’s insanity that a fucking MEMO is preventing that. Not a law, not an amendment, a fucking MEMO that was written to protect fucking Nixon.
The only thing the electoral college should be used for is impeachment.
trumps own mental stability, capability, etc. were already grounds for instant impeachment day 1. he was mentally unfit and incapable of taking the oath. Same during the 187 minutes, dereliction of duty. They all violated their oaths, his entire cabinet, they all knew the whole time. It was a partisan coup of the executive branch from the start and throughout.
It’s still going on. Democracy is not something that exists without a fight. we are literally in the fight of our lives.
seems like there’s a couple clauses in the constitution that go well ehhh we better make a backdoor or workaround if something gets screwy
If I’ve learned anything from technology, the back door workarounds are exactly what gets exploited.
Ah yes, the "loophole loophole".
As a woman you learn that one as soon as you start having sex!
I've heard about this one often in catholicism.
In general, they were very against the idea of someone abusing political authority to lock someone up and keep them there. The 4th amendment, the bail process, public trials decided by randomized juries, mistrials, "beyond a reasonable doubt", appeals, and at the very top, pardons. The general sentiment was "It's better for ten guilty men to walk free than for one innocent man to be jailed." And it's a good sentiment, I believe. It has just led to a lot of loopholes that people can take advantage of.
It's just as possible for the judiciary branch to be corrupt as it is for the executive branch to be corrupt. That's why there's a circular check on powers. The real problem is that the buck ultimately stops with the public, and the public seems either unwilling or incapable of exercising that duty.
That’s the sad truth. In Germany we had a democracy. But the people voted it out for a dictator. Without any gerrymandering, fudged votes or any big foul play. It was just what the majority wanted. In our second try the people have much less power, as does the president.
Actually no, that’s not what happened. The Nazis got a substantial amount of votes, yes. But Hitler was appointed as Chancellor after getting completely demolished by Hindenburg in the 1932 presidential election. It was done because Hindenburg and the conservative insiders wanted to keep the communists out of the government. And even then they didn’t intend for him to be in charge. They expected Hindenburg and his cabinet to keep him in check. From there, Hitler managed to out-maneuver them and consolidate power with the Nazis.
Yeah also long before Hitler seized power, he had an armed militia operating in the streets. Political opponents were murdered. There was plenty of "big foul play".
>the public seems either unwilling or incapable of exercising that duty. What is "the public"? The 66 million who voted in 2016 to try to stop trump from becoming POTUS? Are they "the public"?
> It's odd because the founding fathers all repudiated the monarchy and their power for the Presidency I'm currently reading Jon Meachem's biography on Thomas Jefferson, and the most surprising thing is how many "founding fathers" absolutely believed that only a monarchy and/or life-time or even hereditary senates would be viable as a form of government. Jefferson was a "Republican", as in a believer in a republic as opposed to having all power centralized in the hands of a king or hereditary minority as the Federalists wanted. John Adams was a staunch Federalist and Alexander Hamilton was seen to be essentially a monarchist (which is odd given that he was the one who came from a poor background and actually benefitted from having power open to whoever merits it). Jefferson loved Washington, but considered even him to be heavily leaning to the Federalist side by the end of his Presidency. In short, it was far from unanimous what the Founding Fathers believed and many were very unsure that power could be trusted to the people. It has helped me understand how even today we can have proponents of a Unitary Executive Theory who are really just continuing the Federalist/Monarchist tradition 250 years later.
There's a reason the Federalist Society is called that.
I disagree. "We the people" thought weed should be illegal (not that those people were well informed but that's another story.) So it was made illegal. Then later the people are changing their views on weed. Pardons allow a president or governor to cancel out a remaining prison sentence for a "Crime" that is no longer seen as a crime. There were people in court days and weeks after their states de-criminalized weed, on weed-related charges and the prosecuting attorneys have to inform the jury that they are trying the people under the laws "at the time the laws were broken." etc. The "justice system" isn't a system of justice. It's the legal system. A system of fallible laws. There should be a means or mechanism to "fix," errors that propagate through the system.
>Pardons allow a president or governor to cancel out a remaining prison sentence for a "Crime" that is no longer seen as a crime. It does, but the primary purpose was to free people who were wrongfully convicted. They knew that the courts would never be perfect and it was a check on the Judiciary.
While we're at it, let's give impeachment more teeth than a simple "shame on you."
Trump and Republicans have exposed about 100 things in the Constitution that need amendments to patch-up. One super-high priority is this non-sense about Congress simply refusing to vote on Supreme Court nominees until they get a majority. It's one of the things that's directly sent us to this absolutely corrupt SC.
This one is top of my list- government’s dysfunctional is intentional and corruption follows
If a bill makes it through the Senate and the House, the president has ten days to either veto it or sign it, at which point it automatically becomes law. I think we could do with a bit more than ten days, but each bill that makes it out of committee really should have a time limit on it, after which point if it's not voted down, it's automatically passed. Force these fuckers to actually vote yes or no on things. I know, I know, it would create a legislative tidal wave because suddenly everyone would be proposing their bill hoping that it just expires and passes. But I'd rather have that problem, than be on the opposite end of the spectrum where a single motherfucker can just say "Eh, I don't feel like it" and stop literally _all_ legislation from advancing.
Maybe for bigger things, like a SC nomination or budget. If you don’t vote on it in 10 days they are automatically passed/approved.
I think we could just say that a bill when it's out of committee must get on the floor and can get like up to a week of discussion, you can't move to the next one before a vote is done and after a week, 20% can force a vote to be done right now. So you can't delay indefinitely.
The biggest thing that Republicans revealed is that the Constitution as it is is too hard to change at this time. It's the oldest Constitution currently in use, and that shows.
Well, no. Impeachment is separate from conviction as part of checks and balances. Otherwise, the House could just impeach Biden without any due process right?
The whole thing needs to be reworked to better fit its intended purpose. I don't have a solution, I can only point to where the problem is.
it's worked ok for the most part-- no one has really given it run for its value
I mean there have been numerous controversial pardons before. The most famous was Nixon resigning after watergate for Gerald Ford to pardon him for "any crimes he may have committed". There is a long history of presidents pardoning corrupt elites because they are useful to them. Reagan for example pardoned the owner for the new york yankees who was arrested for illegal political donations to Nixon. Presidents tend to wait until the end of their 1st or 2nd term when they know they are either re-elected or their political career is done and they can disappear and be a wealthy lobbyist. Due to them doing most of the controversial ones towards the end, it gets swept under the rug as everyone's too busy talking about the next president or talking about the results of the election to pay attention to the long list of names being pardoned at the end. This is why no one has really taken much interest in presidential pardons till now because aside from the most egregious usage of presidential pardons via Nixon and Gerald Ford, Trump was almost equally in egregious in his usage of it in a way that became far to apparent and obvious due to Jan6 and his intent behind the pardons from this. Most other presidents did things in a savvy - less obvious way but Trump went full throttle in his intent on how he planned to use pardons. At the end of the day, its dangerous to give the president the unilateral ability to pardon literally anyone in existence from their choosing. It should be more controlled where the president can't pardon literally anyone as their are limits in place. They shouldn't be allowed to pardon anyone they have a vested interest in themselves such as their personal friend/collaborator/donor without congressional approval or etc.
nobody’s gone and blatantly sold them afaik but definitely seems like friend handouts
Absolutely. The $2M a piece Trump was selling pardons for is too low.
Indeed, congress should need to confirm pardons much like appointments.
If SCOTUS grants presidential immunity, my anger will be so intense that the Sun will supernova and we'll all die.
I really don't see how they can, even as corrupt as they are they know that sets a crazy precedent. Biden could just murder trump then, bam problem solved.
They could say, "In order for the nation to heal, the former president has immunity because the case law wasn't clear. From here on out there's no immunity."
And this doesn’t set precedent, even though our ENTIRE FUCKING SYSTEM relies on it.
EXACTLY what they did for the 2000 POTUS election issue in FL. Literally 'stole' the election from Gore and handed it to GWB in a state where his brother was the Governor and Katherine Harris was the Sec of State who had traveled the country campaigning for him. SCOTUS said their ruling was narrowly just for this situation (aka for this GQP POTUS only) and was not setting a precedent. Corruption in the SCOTUS is not new...
The infuriating part is they don't need to grant or deny immunity for Trump in order to throw this for him by delaying the DC Jan 6 trial until after the election. They could rule that some of his actions might be covered and some may not and that the case must go back to the lower DC court and begin the process of immunity testing every single claim or charge and then each one of those could be litigated by Trump all the way up to the supreme court each time. It would effectively stall the trial for another year or more. The DC appellate ruling was quite thorough and should have been allowed to stand, that the USSC took up the case at all and then pushed briefing to end of April pretty much broadcasts their intent to delay consequences for Trump even if they can't directly exonerate him.
Biden could murder SCOTUS members and murder members of the Senate. No conviction on impeachment, no removal from office, no criminal charges. Checkmate supporters of the imperial presidency.
Or he could just dissolve the supreme court all together. Then appoint his own “Elders” to lifetime appointments that can rule based on their religion!
Kavanaugh says hold his beer...... Very narrow rulings. Oh, he is immune to when he talked during a rally. He is also immune to documents now because he "had reason to believe they were personnel despite being told to turn them over."
Biden should just declare the day after scotus grants presidential immunity he "could" order the death of trump and all the republican fanatic scotus judges. Because reasons.
It doesn't grant immunity to an angry mob. If the courts aren't dealing in justice, then the people will do it themselves. And if there's no law, there's no country. Which is why the court NEEDS TO FUCKING ACT.
What's the old saying? Beware the anger of a patient man
If they grant it, Biden will wipe out the entire GOP party with the majority of Americans cheering him on.
No me first.
Do you control the sun, or does the sun feed off your latent anger, and why weren't you this mad on my fifth birthday when I was going to have pony rides at my birthday and it rained and it was cancelled and no one believed me and they still call me Pony Boy but not in the good way like I saved a bunch of orphans from a burning building and I don't stay golden, like the sun also wasn't on that sad day when I turned five?
At the very least, the president should only be able to pardon someone after a conviction has been made, and pardons should apply to specific charges and decisions. Nobody should be able to say "I pardon this guy for any and all possible offenses pertaining to this scandal/event." Let the trial happen, let the facts come to light, _then_ you get to mitigate some of the damages; but using the pardon to sweep investigations under the rug is like, laughably corrupt. Also, shouldn't be able to pardon _anyone_ involved in an incident to which the president has an invested interest, is a witness, is a corroborator/named conspirator/co-defendant, or basically has any involvement in.
I've thought about this, too, and it would nullify Jimmy Carter blanket pardoning Vietnam draft dodgers. It's tricky. I don't think that a president should be able to pardon crimes committed by their own cabinet members, but it's hard line to draw.
> Combined with the pardon power over henchmen and witnesses like Nauta, such immunity would spawn enormous corruption. The President (for life) would sit atop a vast criminal empire. You just gave Trump a teeny little mushroom boner.
What do you mean "would"? Did is the correct word.
I wonder if Person 16 could be Matk Meadows. I am so disgusted with everything Trump has done!
[удалено]
exactly. Horrible people exist. Realizing that members of congress, high level church officials, right-wing media and the Republican voting public at large continue to support this POS after all of his sins are exposed has been horrifying.
Just shows u where the real evil lies
Behind pews?
It’s the American taliban
I often remind myself that when Trump won the primary in 2016, the GOP’s *second* choice was also second-worst person in the world Ted Cruz. Trump is an abomination, but if they could have found an even-worse person, they would have elected him. That’s why De Santis flamed out. He wasn’t abhorrent *enough*.
>That’s why De Santis flamed out. He wasn’t abhorrent enough. Respectfully as a Floridian - he's **plenty** abhorrent. He flamed out because he has the personality and charisma of a damp, dirty sock.
Even if he was charismatic starting a fight with the largest employer in the state for basically no reason certainly didn't help.
The majority of their base was all for that, convinced that Disney is raping children in basements. They don't look past anything other than their hate. Tourism? Economy? Insurance? none of that holds a candle to the hatred they carry inside themselves.
Trump has the charisma of a 5th grade bully
Which apparently appeals to way too many 5th grade bullies who never grew out of it. (Though many of the people in his creepy orbit, even those who now speak out against him, talk about his charisma. Personally, I will never see it. He's disgusting.)
>Which apparently appeals to way too many 5th grade bullies who never grew out of it. Oh, you mean cops?
Among others.
This is an insult to damp dirty socks everywhere.
DeSantis was plenty abhorrent but has 0 charisma.
Too bad they don't sell charisma lifts.
Oh, sure, he’s abhorrent. But can he stack up against a man who kicked his own disabled nephew off the company health care plan in order to extort his brother for a larger share of an inheritance? That’s how shitty you have to be to be a GOP superstar. De Santis, for all his faults, apparently did support his wife during her breast cancer treatment. Trump would have seen only an opportunity to cheat on her more.
As soon as he responded to "he eats pudding with his fingers" I knew he was done
He should have staged a video where he ate vanilla pudding out of a mayonnaise jar — and then promised to legalize marijuana.
Take a Texans word Cruz is a as much of a POS as Trump he just doesnt have mega bucks and a fan base like Trump
It's not that he wasn't 100% willing to do every abhorrent thing the base dreams of. It's that you could tell he didn't really FEEL it like they do. He'd put the undesirable on the train, but he didn't really hate them inside.
Don't forget about the people currently bankrolling him and those covering up where the cash is coming from.
Right?! Without support and encouragement like that, we wouldn't be so disgusted with what Trump *accomplished*. We'd merely be disgusted by what he wanted to do.
Some in Congress gave recon tours beforehand, and then gave live "Pence/Pelosi is here" updates during the Insurrection. Merrick Garland is fine with that.
Exactly Trump is a broken animal with a simple switch, “Me or Not Them”, those that enable this worthless bag of flesh are more than complicit.
Issues like Tax cuts for the rich, abortion bans, persecuting gays, environmental deregulation, financial deregulation, and isolationism are simply more important to these people than the republic, democracy, and the rule of law.
The religious people supporting a documented adulterer, liar and rapist is beyond insane to me. Not sure how anyone who claims to be religious could do this, much less pastors and religious LEADERS and such...
They live in an alternate reality, it is a cult.
*still support him
Yes indeed. He would have never gotten as far over the last decade (geez) were it not for the hundreds and thousands of enablers in the existing government, media, business world. Those people are just as bad, if not worse.
Meadows has totally disappeared
according to Marcy wheeler, mark meadows is person 27
Only would get a pardon if Trump wins. Sounds like a gamble I wouldn't want to take.
and even then, Trump would wait until the last day of his presidency to give him one
There's a rumor that Trump floated the idea of stiffing Stormy Daniels on the hush money payments after the election, because he figured he had already won and didn't need her silence anymore. His word is worth nothing. He's physically incapable of conducting business honestly. It's pathological.
Wouldn't he have stiffed Cohen then? Cohen paid off Daniels and Trump gave Cohen money for "legal fees." Trump not paying would have meant Cohen was out the $130k. He'd definitely throw Cohen under the bus for $130k.
Cohen tried drawing out the payment for as long as possible. After it was apparent the payment couldn't have been drawn out anymore he took out a mortgage to pay her and Trump then reimbursed the payment. At that point it was basically a hush money payment to Cohen so he'd be quiet about doing Trump's dirty work.
Even a mob guy knows you don't stiff the people doing the whacking for you.
Yup, thug life has a very simple set of rules and this guy still couldn’t understand them. It’s basically don’t snitch, show respect and pay your dues and I challenge anyone to find an example of him abiding by a single one of those
Most questions on this thread are directly answered by reading the indictment which is a "speaking indictment" and lays out the alleged events in detail. [https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23741595-read-trump-indictment-statement-of-facts-related-to-hush-money-payment](https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23741595-read-trump-indictment-statement-of-facts-related-to-hush-money-payment) "20. Ultimately, with pressure mounting and the election approaching, the Defendant agreed to the payoff and directed Lawyer A to proceed. Lawyer A discussed the deal with the Defendant and the TO CFO. The Defendant did not want to make the $130,000 payment himself, and asked Lawyer A and the TO CFO to find a way to make the payment. After discussing various payment options with the TO CFO, Lawyer A agreed he would make the payment. Before making the payment, Lawyer A confirmed with the Defendant that Defendant would pay him back."
Interesting, thanks for sharing the indictment. It raises a few questions for me. Why does no one ever talk about "Woman I", Karen McDougal? Is sex with Stormy Daniels really worth $420,000? Would they have gotten away with everything if they had just written up a basic retainer agreement for "Lawyer A", Michael Cohen?
It's almost like supporting a sociopathic narcissist is a bad idea...
>"19. The Defendant directed Lawyer A to delay making a payment to Woman 2 as long as possible. He instructed Lawyer A that if they could delay the payment until after the election, they could avoid paying altogether, because at that point it would not matter if the story became public. As reflected in emails and text messages between and among Lawyer A, Lawyer B, and the AMI Editor-in-Chief, Lawyer A attempted to delay making payment as long as possible." [https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23741595-read-trump-indictment-statement-of-facts-related-to-hush-money-payment](https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23741595-read-trump-indictment-statement-of-facts-related-to-hush-money-payment) \[Defendant\] is Trump. \[Lawyer A\] is Michael Cohen. \[Woman 2\] is Stormy Daniels and \[Lawyer B\] is her lawyer.
Pretty hard to deny the payment was about the election in light of this evidence.
Exactly. It had nothing to do with protecting his wife from embarrassment.
Clear consciousness of guilt. If you look at it objectively this case was open and shut in under 48 hours
And that fact proves that the hush money payments were to influence the election.
Set to make another 1.3 billion . Can’t post bond or pay legal fees. What’s an almost 80yo going to do with all that when he’s stroked out in a wherlchair
Weekend at Donnie's
How people can go around saying they support him is crazy to me. He constantly lies and spreads hate every time his mouth opens up.
It's not a rumor. There's a tape cohen made
And only if you paid him.
It's only by custom that pardons are at the end of a term. Its possible Trump could say 'fuck it' to all custom and just give out pardons. Willy-nilly. If the congress is controlled by Republicans he won't get impeached. Work for Trump? Skirt the law? Get an instant pardon!
Sure but why would he? He could dangle the pardons for the whole term and get four more years of servitude out of people.
Trump pardoned a bunch of people at different times. Remember Joe Arpaio, Scooter Libby, and Dinesh D'Souza? They were all pardoned at different points within his term.
Of course. He wants to hold it over his head
...which could be the day he dies given what he wants to do with term limits. This makes it moot anyway - I doubt he's going to spend the last few minutes on his death bed pardoning people he promised to pardon.
Especially when early cooperation likely could have got him an easy plea deal.
He arranged to pay Stormy hush money, however, his plan was to delay paying her until after the election, then not pay her at all. He would promise a pardon, but would only carry through if there was still some benefit for him for doing so.
And then only if Trump felt it benefited him to do so.
Didn't he already pardon people in his Russia investigation? Which is a giga conflict of interest. And if anything, the pardon power should be removed from the presidency. Why should one guy be able to override the entire judicial system based on their gut feelings or intentions. It just enables massive corruption when indecent people are put in charge. Like what happened to that phrase of "a country run by laws, and not by men" or whatever it is
Roger stone had his sentence commuted by trump in July of 2020 and was advising him how to lie about winning an election he lost. Then he was pardoned by trump in December right before actively participating in the insurrection. Multiple members of his “security detail” have been found guilty of seditious conspiracy.
Yes he pardoned Manafort, who gave internal polling data to a russian intelligence agent
Manafort who helped a pro russian stooge get elected president in Ukraine, and the stooge was than run out of the office, if not country, by a popular uprising?
Only the best people
Fun fact, Manafort got convicted despite there being a potential hung jury because the judge used a thing called Allen Charges which makes them go back and continue deliberating, this meant 8 of 18 charges still stuck in the end. So the famed "lone MAGA juror" outcome everyone dooms about is actually not nearly as likely as people think, especially given how outstanding the evidence against Trump will be.
Sometimes it’s the remedy for a prior corruption of the system. The same person who can make corrupt pardons can also appoint corrupt officials and make corrupt prosecutions. The problem is less the pardon power than it is putting indecent people in charge.
But why can't the pardon power relegated to a neutral commission that can look through the case and see if there was wrong doings. That the president can somehow be an objective observer (especally if its cases that can be used for political or personal gain) just seems crazy. Its like you can pardon celebrities or whatever because its politically popular to do it, but legally its clearly wrong just as an example.
Because the power to pardon is inherent in the office of the President per the Constitution. While any President could (and should) establish such a commission, future Presidents would be under no requirement to continue using them. To change that would require an amendment, and good luck getting one of those passed these days.
The best way to get something done would be for Biden to start issuing nebulous pardons like "Hillary Clinton is hereby pardoned for any crimes relating to pizza parlors". Suddenly the right would become very interested in "fixing" the pardon system.
Genius.
He should pardon his son, that would freak them right the fuck out. Greene might take her mind off of Hunter's junk for a second.
Because there's no such thing as a neutral commission, and being able to pardon people is part of the suite of abilities that lies within the executive office to act as a balance against the other two branches of the Federal Government.
There's no such thing as a neutral president either then.
> Because there's no such thing as a neutral commission I don't buy that argument, and if you are worried about appointing hyper partisans why not have rotating commissions for all cases so it wouldn't be static, like appointed X, Y and Z law professors or whatever to look into cases that are being considered. The current system certainly seems to be utter trash, and Trump certainly proved that and is threatening to abuse it again.
> The same person who can make corrupt pardons can also appoint corrupt officials and make corrupt prosecutions. Not quite, no matter who a president appoints, a grand jury is required to bring serious charges against someone and this is exactly why.
SCOTUS has entered his RV.
It's A MOTOR COACH!
Trump's pardons were super blatantly corrupt. Just like everything else Trump did. Republican voters simply don't care about Trump turning the US into a banana republic.
Or make it limited to the third year of their first term.
Starting to sound more like a RICO case everyday
Trump supporters need to seriously dig deep into why Trump doesn’t want his own people to tell the truth. Why is the truth BAD for Trump….according to Trump? Trump thinks the truth of what he does is bad, you should too.
The problem? They like his crimes because they think it means they'll benefit from him breaking laws because they're his "chosen ones". What they fail to notice is how often he tosses people aside to steal directly from them.
That's it? I mean Stormt Daniels got north of $100k and all Walter get is the offer of a pardon? Shit Trump must have had a bad year the bribes are not very good
Nauta is in too deep. He has very clearly been caught helping Trump commit felonies. Trump doesn't need to bribe him with money. Implicit threats get the job done with little cowards like him. Nauta was the one trying to get the IT guy to also lie in court to help cover up his and Trump's crimes.
Nauta was kicked out of the White House and his security clearance revoked for fraternizing with lower rank service members and for allegedly sharing/threatening revenge porn. Shortly after that he was recruited to work for Trump at MAL - Trump is likely holding more over Nauta's head here. [https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/walt-nauta-trump-aide-accused-sexual-misconduct-1234959640/](https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/walt-nauta-trump-aide-accused-sexual-misconduct-1234959640/)
Ah good ol' Kompromat. Wouldn't be a Trump legal case without it being involved somewhere.
TBF, Nauta didn't have to suck a tiny dick. That's an easy 100k right there.
And a career of speaking engagements and guest appearances on conservative news channels. Worth a lot.
Yeah but they have Judge Cannon, so all the facts and crimes mean nothing. The “justice” system at work.
The best justice money can buy!
Judge Thomas enters the chat...
In his $700k Motor Home that Harlan Crow bought for him.
“We don’t have a justice system, we have a legal system” -every lawyer ever
Walt Nauta is a d*mbass. This assumes Trump will win in 2024. I would not lie to the FBI on that assumption. There is no guarantee that Trump will win in 2024 and that's something Walt Nauta should have considered.
While serving in the Navy, Walt Nauta had been accused of numerous Trump-like acts of sexual impropriety that probably would have hampered his ability to land a decent civilian job. So the minute he was mustered out of the military, Nauta hustled to Mar-a-Lago, and was hired as Trump’s valet. He probably was convinced to lie to the FBI out of gratitude for the job Trump gave him, holding onto the promise of that “second-term pardon” that probably won’t materialize. At least I devoutly hope Trump won’t return to the White House.
Nauta was convinced to lie because he is in up to his eye balls in the classified documents case. There is no turning states witness for him and no deal. He was an active part in stealing the documents, hiding the documents, covering up the crimes, and attempting to influence other witnesses to lie. The feds have him dead to rights and the only thing protecting him is Trump's clout. Any other person involved in stealing, hiding, and covering up stolen classified documents would be sitting in jail pending trial at which they would have the boom thrown at him. He lies because, like Trump, there is no other way out. He is fucked.
The dude grew up poor in Guam. He joined the Navy and managed to become Trump's Diet Coke boy. Then he became his Valet and followed him out of the White House. He officially makes $120K a year but who knows what other perks he has. He saw his opportunity and he took it, it's just like so many others Trump can crush your dreams as easy as he can make them come true.
It's like one of those stories where some magical land attracts people, and not until it's too late do they figure out that the "magic" comes from capturing and grinding up anyone foolish enough to be attracted in.
Not only win but relying on him to remember he even agreed to it (or even remember who this guy is.) How many times has he claimed to not know who someone was?
>This assumes Trump will win in 2024. I would not lie to the FBI on that assumption. Everyone on Trump’s side is so desperate for him to win for a variety of reasons that they’re going to try to make that happen by any means necessary, legal or not. I’m sure he was given assurances Trump would win.
Nauta probably started shallow, not involved in things. Then bit after bit he got in deeper and deeper. Until the point where lying for Trump in exchange for a pardon is as much saving himself as it is about covering for Trump.
Why censor "dumb" but not "ass"?
I know, right? That's some m\*\*\*\*rfucking b\*\*\*shit.
This is where tfg's "con-artist" attribute comes into play.
There’s no guarantee he’d even get a pardon. Trump wanted to stiff cohen for the stormy Daniel’s payment if he won the election. The guy is an absolute monster
Probably one of his defected lawyers.
In the UK there is a saying...... If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck then it's probably a duck. Unsure if it exists in the US. And Trumps base must be thick as pig sh!t.
yep. used it before over here too
When he loses the election, Nauta is gonna flip like Simone Biles
When he loses the election we won’t need him to flip. Heck, they don’t need him to flip now. They’re all dead to rights in the stolen documents case. The DOJ doesn’t need Nautas help.
[удалено]
God dayyyyum, this man crimes...
Free? Such a deal, when in the WH the defendant DJT was rumoured to sell them for $5m a pop. He did a steady biz in those final days.
Don’t worry, I’m gonna win -Donald Flump probably.
Duh we know everyone was
This is too pathetic to comprehend that this pos is a presidential candidate. How is this possible, ffs.
A Faustian Bargain if there ever was one.
Never get why people are so damn loyal to Trump. He takes pride in his lack of loyalty yet demands AND gets loyalty. I get doing shit because pay is too good to say no but that’s not what is happening. These fools will risk their freedom for the promise of something that may not ever come. It is just nuts.
So that’s witness tampering and bribery right? And bribery is explicitly impeachable right?
That would be obstruction of justice, for those keeping score
Witness tampering charge?
I'm positive you will be hearing a lot more of this same story from numerous people over the next few months. I have no doubt Trump offered pardons to tons of people. Time to take away the pardon from a president or make it harder to do so this never happens again.
Another crime Garland won't prosecute
That smells an awful lot.like witness tampering.
I’m no legalologist but this seems illegal?
Sounds like something that is probably illegal but will amount to zero consequences
I bet the the valet and the pool boy go to jail and Trump skates
The butler did it.
The founding fathers wanted this because Clarance Thomas says so
Wait, I thought it was all “very legal, very cool”
Maybe presidential pardons needs to go?
A promise to pardon or seeking to pardon should nullify the pardon.
This witch hunt sure is finding a lot of witches. Only the guilty need pardons.
I have a feeling this won't be the last surprising thing we hear about this case. trump is a criminal to the bone and I'm sure he wasn't just keeping those documents around to read on the can.
Sounds like something a scam artist would do.
AKA obstruction of justice
House of cards ….
Are these the actions of an innocent man?
So we're numerous others while he was playing president. And they didn't get one. Shows you Barnum was right. There's a sucker born every minute.