• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Republican candidates?

Father Heathen

Father Heathen

Veteran Member
Evangelicalhumanist said:
As Trump continues to defy the Judge's orders in the Documents Case, what actually happens if the Judge decides to revoke bail -- and remand him in custody? The real question being this: do the court officers go to battle with the Secret Service over whether Trump goes to jail or back to Bedminster?

That oughta be very, very interesting!
Click to expand...
If only they could stick him in with the general pop behind bars.
 
We Never Know

We Never Know

No Slack
Evangelicalhumanist said:
As Trump continues to defy the Judge's orders in the Documents Case, what actually happens if the Judge decides to revoke bail -- and remand him in custody? The real question being this: do the court officers go to battle with the Secret Service over whether Trump goes to jail or back to Bedminster?

That oughta be very, very interesting!
Click to expand...
"Judge decides to revoke bail"

Did Trump even have to post bail?
 
metis

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
We Never Know said:
"Judge decides to revoke bail"

Did Trump even have to post bail?
Click to expand...
Not as far as I know.

BTW, if you and I robbed a 7-11 store and got caught, about how long do you figure it would take before we saw a judge and was sentenced?
 
We Never Know

We Never Know

No Slack
crossfire said:
Yes.
​
US Constitution, Fourteenth Amendment, Section 3:​
​
​
No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.​

January 6th might qualify, especially if it is proved that Trump tried to make Mike Pence reject the electors. He swore to uphold the Constitution in his oath of office, and then tried to undermine the Constitution to stay in power, breaking his oath of office. I seriously doubt that Trump can get two-thirds of each House to vote to excuse such an action.
Click to expand...
"have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof"

Yep. They figured out he couldnt be disqualified by the other criminal charges even if convicted so Jan 6th charges were filed(the last charges filed coincidently).
Don't get me wrong Trump is a narcissist that shouldn't be president but IMO its not about the prosecutions, its about getting him out of politics period.
 
We Never Know

We Never Know

No Slack
metis said:
Not as far as I know.

BTW, if you and I robbed a 7-11 store and got caught, about how long do you f igure it would take before we saw a judge and was sentenced?
Click to expand...
We aren't the elite or a politician so it would be a bit then we would have to post bail(if we were given bail)
 
metis

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
We Never Know said:
We aren't the elite or a politician so it would be a bit then we would have to post bail(if we were given bail)
Click to expand...
Yep, and that's my point. Supposedly, our criminal justice system is supposed to be "blind" and fair across the board, but... :shrug:
 
Callisto

Callisto

Hellenismos, BTW
We Never Know said:
"Judge decides to revoke bail"

Did Trump even have to post bail?
Click to expand...
There are 3 ways you can gain freedom prior to a criminal trial: bail, bond, appearance bond. Bails and bonds are similar in that they're paid to ensure the accused shows up, otherwise, the money is forfeited. If you pay cash, that's bail. If you don't have the cash then you take out a loan using collateral with a bails bondsman and that's paying with a bond. tldr; if you use cash to stay out of jail it's bail, if you use collateral it's a bond.

Trump was released on an appearance bond (or signature bond). This is used in federal court and that's when the defendant signs an agreement that they'll appear in court as ordered along with various other stipulations; and if they fail to comply then they're to pay whatever amount the court designates. Generally, this is granted to people who are considered a low flight risk, which personally I don't find Trump to be. He hero-worships various autocrats, did his best to cozy up to them while in office, took classified documents (and it's a safe bet not all were retrieved), and owns his own jet. At the very, very least, I hope they confiscated his passport. The House really needs to get a move on and pass that REAP Act, this is not a typical former POTUS and deserves absolutely no deferential treatment, he's purely a criminal.
 
Watchmen

Watchmen

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Subduction Zone said:
Oh the left is far from perfect. There is no doubt about that. But one has to keep these differences in perspective.

The problem is that the world is changing and those in the Republican party do not see to understand that.
Click to expand...
And those on the left don’t seem to understand that their own extreme positions make things difficult. It’s very frustrating for a moderate like me.
 
Shaul

Shaul

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
crossfire said:
Yes.
​
US Constitution, Fourteenth Amendment, Section 3:​
​
​
No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.​

January 6th might qualify, especially if it is proved that Trump tried to make Mike Pence reject the electors. He swore to uphold the Constitution in his oath of office, and then tried to undermine the Constitution to stay in power, breaking his oath of office. I seriously doubt that Trump can get two-thirds of each House to vote to excuse such an action.
Click to expand...
It doesn't qualify in Trump's case. He has never even been indicted for such a crime. Even assuming he were so indicted today it is quite unlikely he would be convicted of such before the election.
 
Callisto

Callisto

Hellenismos, BTW
Shaul said:
It doesn't qualify in Trump's case. He has never even been indicted for such a crime. Even assuming he were so indicted today it is quite unlikely he would be convicted of such before the election.
Click to expand...
Incorrect. He's under multiple indictments. And he can be convicted before the election.
 
Orbit

Orbit

I'm a planet
metis said:
Yep, and that's my point. Supposedly, our criminal justice system is supposed to be "blind" and fair across the board, but... :shrug:
Click to expand...

In a way they are blind and fair, and in the matter of Trump, it hamstrings them. To give an example, over this summer I was in a research program funded by a three-letter Federal law enforcement agency that I shouldn't name but you can probably guess. I was researching the online spread of extremist anti-government ideologies by groups that organized the Jan 6th insurrection. In delivering my results, which the data showed were highly partisan and highly polarized, I was admonished to avoid all appearance of attacking one side or the other. But the groups in my dataset were doing precisely that, and those concerned with domestic terrorism ignore it at their peril --precisely because they don't want to seem partisan.
 
Subduction Zone

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Orbit said:
In a way they are blind and fair, and in the matter of Trump, it hamstrings them. To give an example, over this summer I was in a research program funded by a three-letter Federal law enforcement agency that I shouldn't name but you can probably guess. I was researching the online spread of extremist anti-government ideologies by groups that organized the Jan 6th insurrection. In delivering my results, which the data showed were highly partisan and highly polarized, I was admonished to avoid all appearance of attacking one side or the other. But the groups in my dataset were doing precisely that, and those concerned with domestic terrorism ignore it at their peril --precisely because they don't want to seem partisan.
Click to expand...
Aah yes, the FFA, the Future Farmers of America. I am very familiar with them. You must have been working in this part of it:

www.ffa.org

See Something Say Something

www.ffa.org www.ffa.org
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top