We may be overexaggerating that risk. If the U.S could withstand the fallout of him having stacks of classified documents laying around his home and showing them off to people, they probably can withstand the risk of him mouthing off to a guard or other inmates. Keep in mind that the former situation was relatively uncontrolled, whereas in prison he would be tightly monitored. I also have to think that the staff charged with looking after him would be strictly vetted.
I think there are definitely ways of keeping him in an actual prison that would minimise both the risk to him and the risk he would pose. The biggest argument against it is more the symbolism of sending him to prison in the first place and what that could do to the stability of the USA. But if convicted he absolutely deserves to go to prison, in principle.
There is a simple reason that Trump has so few defenders on this forum, and this thread but its not what you think it is.
Sure thing, you yourself aren't a Trump supporter though, right? 😁
A few reminders
If you cannot interact in a civil manner, do not post
This thread is about Trump. There is a separate thread where Biden can be discussed
This is a discussion site. If you wish to post a link please at least attempt to add some commentary of your own
Discussion of fake tan, size of hands and other appearance matters add nothing to the discussion. Yes there is a mug shot that is being used for political purposes, but beyond that at least make an attempt to post in a constructive manner and try and avoid lowering the discussion with attempts to ridicule Trump by commenting on his appearance
Oh, look. Another quip.
The Trump defenders' idol is finally getting his comeuppance after decades of being a dirty scumbag including rape, racism, misogyny and grifting.
Technically no as I dont want him to run for President.
Good article here on confirmation bias and its dangers
See point no 3
An inability to debate constructively and without rancour?
That is kind of the point of cameo appearances in movies, they rarely actually add anything to the plot.
“Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.” - Francis M Wilhoit
When was Trump convicted for rape?
the judge found he had committed rape in the E Jean Carroll case
I thought it was a jury trial and he wasn’t convicted of rape.
Would it make a difference to you if he was?
He wasn't found liable of rape as per the narrow NY state definition of it.
But the judge clarified that the sexual assault could be properly described as rape.
In Ireland, it would be classed as rape, and in multiple other jurisdictions.
Therefore statement of fact - Trump is a rapist.
Just wondering if the previous posters were correct or incorrect.
He was found liable for Sexual Assault under NY Penal Code because NYPC archaically does not recognize digital rape as rape, whereas the vast majority of the rest of the world, and the United States, does.
From the same paper:
“As the court explained in its recent decision denying Mr Trump’s motion for a new trial on damages and other relief [in the New York case] … based on all of the evidence at trial and the jury’s verdict as a whole, the jury’s finding that Mr Trump ‘sexually abused’ Ms Carroll implicitly determined that he forcibly penetrated her digitally – in other words, that Mr Trump in fact did ‘rape’ Ms Carroll as that term commonly is used and understood in contexts outside of the New York penal law.”
The single reason Donald Trump was not convicted of the narrow New York definition of rape, is that his victim could not tell if she had been penetrated by a finger or by his reportedly very small and thin penis.
Trumps fans somehow consider this to be a win.
@Snake Plisken I apologize for being uncivil before.
He was never going to be convicted, it wasn't a criminal trial.
As always when the conversation comes to "fascism", the simple thing to do is ask oneself: how does the GOP and its various arms stack up against the intellectual concept of fascism as am ideal.
To whit: once more hello Umberto Eco and his instructive essay about Ur Fascism. I think many could be easily seen in the actions, words and philosophy of the modern Christian conservative movement, making the fascists by deed, if not name.
so the cases under the 14th amendment have started.
Outside of all the other cases that he is tied up in these are tasty from a purely constitutional basis. I'm wondering where this will go as there are rumours that there will be cases like this in numerous states.
I also wonder when all is said and done will there be a coming together and an agreement between both sides to put in more stringent balances to stop what has gone on over the last few years.
Fine thing to joke about
OMG, RIP. I loved the Price is Right.
Now this is a fascinating development
Peter Carr, a spokesman for the special counsel, said Bratt was at the White House for a “case-related interview” but declined to comment further.
A person with knowledge of the 2023 visit insisted that it was “an interview of a career official who was also working at the White House during the Trump Administration.” (NYT)
Rudy Giuliani incriminated himself and his criminal coconspirators with his remarks on this issue:
“There is no legitimate purpose for a line [DOJ] guy to be meeting with the White House except if it’s coordinated by the highest levels,” said former NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani to the Post, who also was indicted in Georgia by DA Fani Willis. “What’s happening is they have trashed every ethical rule that exists and they have created a state police. It is a Biden state prosecutor and a Biden state police.”
This line will get played verbatim in at minimum the DC case, in which Jeffrey Clark is charged with having off-books meetings with the WH against explicit DOJ instructions barring such meetings, hoping to have himself installed as Acting AG over his superiors to further the conspiracy:
By comparison, this was reportedly a meeting between DOJ and Biden WH co-counsels that has an apparent government function, however you can be guaranteed MAGA will suddenly gobble up what was written up in "the failing New York Times TM" and demand Comer and Gymmy launch a full throated investigation into a burger, patty unseen.
Jesse Watters on Trumps mugshot..
I say this with an unblemished record of heterosexuality. He looks good and he looks hard.
Leaving aside the casual prejudice that comes with the insinuation a homosexual encounter would be a "blemish", am I the only one amused about the wording? That it does somewhat imply Walters has, at least, been tempted by or has thought about men; he just hasn't acted on it yet, thus keeping his record straight - as it were.
As before. It's a cult mixed with the fawning infatuation of infants.
The elevator doesn't go all the way up for that fella ...
Let's be fair, here - he obviously said the qualifying part trying to be funny, in that Fox News Greg Gutfeld type of way, and to negate the double-entendre aspect of the latter part, same way as 'no homo' has been thrown around on the internet for years for the same reason. I'd say he'd want to generate controversy with that excerpt because he can then go on about humourless liberal hand-wringing or some such.
There are better things to take him to task on.
It would be good for a court ruling on the 14th Amendment. Would presume if there are a number, that it would elevate quickly to the Supreme Court. Despite that being a flawed body, a judgement on the issue needs to be made, not simply acted upon by any junior official.
Looks self executing to me. But this won't stop Republican Secretaries of State from allowing him on the ballot.
