Page 1
Page 1
Started By
Message
locked post

Liberal Fantasy: Trump goes to jail as an example for any outsiders in the future

Posted on 4/10/18 at 8:11 am
Posted by KeyserSoze999
Member since Dec 2009
10608 posts
Posted on 4/10/18 at 8:11 am
don't think that they aren't serious, anyone who upsets the power brokers must be crucified as an example

LINK


quote:

Sunday on her weekend morning program, MSNBC's Joy Reid seriously discussed a situation where President Trump refused a subpoena and would have to be arrested and put in jail until he testified before a grand jury. Reid envisioned a scenario of a White House besieged by federal marshals who would wait for Trump to give the Secret Service a stand down order so he could be taken into custody.

"Let's say that Donald Trump decides he doesn't want to give an interview with Mueller, but Mueller says 'Oh, but you will.' And he's subpoenaed to be interviewed byRobert Mueller. And Donald Trump simply says, 'I don't recognize that subpoena.' This is a president whose behavior is different as president of the United States. He doesn't follow convention. Who would force him to comply with the subpoena ordering him to do an interview with Robert Mueller?" Reid asked.

"It would be a federal court judge," former Watergate prosecutor Nick Akerman said.



"How would they enforce it?" she asked.

"Normally, a person who refuses to testify before a grand jury winds up being incarcerated for the time period of the grand jury which can be up to 18 months," Akerman said. "So, one way to enforce it is to have Donald Trump taken by the federal marshals and put into federal prison until he testifies."

"What if he refuses to open the White House door?" Reid asked, seriously. "What if he fires any Secret Service agent who would allow the federal marshals in? What if Donald Trump simply decides I don't have to follow the law? 'I refuse to be held under the law. No marshal can get into this White House and any Secret Service agent who defies me is fired.'"

"Well, at some point he is going to have to come out of the White House," Akerman answered. "At some point, he is going to have to leave and the U.S. Marshals will be directed to take him into custody, bring him before a federal district court judge. He'll be basically told that either he goes in and he testifies or he takes the Fifth Amendment. If he takes the Fifth Amendment, there's not a problem. If he refuses to answer on the grounds that a truthful answer would tend to incriminate him he has the right to do that. If he does that, there's no contempt. If he doesn't do that, he can be directed to go directly to jail. Do not pass go. Do not collect $200. End of story."

As the discussion continued Akerman talked about a bench warrant for Trump and how that would play out with law enforcement. Reid also conceived a situation where Trump wouldn't "recognize the authority" of investigators while "an entire media chorus" would be there to encourage him to be defiant, something she said Nixon did not have.
This post was edited on 4/10/18 at 8:12 am
Posted by NIH
Member since Aug 2008
112552 posts
Posted on 4/10/18 at 8:12 am to
Back the blue - The left
Posted by TigerDoc
Texas
Member since Apr 2004
9894 posts
Posted on 4/10/18 at 8:13 am to
Nick Akerman was part of the Watergate prosecution team. Knows a thing or two about this.
Posted by KeyserSoze999
Member since Dec 2009
10608 posts
Posted on 4/10/18 at 8:14 am to
federal marshals = good

Dallas city cops = bad
Posted by themunch
Earth. maybe
Member since Jan 2007
64583 posts
Posted on 4/10/18 at 8:17 am to
Reid also conceived a situation where Trump wouldn't "recognize the authority" of investigators while "an entire media chorus" would be there to encourage him to be defiant

Oh really.gif
Posted by NIH
Member since Aug 2008
112552 posts
Posted on 4/10/18 at 8:17 am to
Knows about what? A fantasy scenario ?
Posted by The_Duke
Member since Nov 2016
3656 posts
Posted on 4/10/18 at 8:20 am to
quote:

Back the blue - The left



Ay don't be stealing my stuff
Posted by TimeOutdoors
AK
Member since Sep 2014
12120 posts
Posted on 4/10/18 at 8:24 am to
Not just the left. The reality is that politicians do not want non-politicians in office. They are going to do whatever they can to make sure a non-politician is elected again (unless it's a celebrity). Politicians seem to fancy themselves as celebrities too I guess. It definitely will not be a business person with a successful track history.
Posted by TigerDoc
Texas
Member since Apr 2004
9894 posts
Posted on 4/10/18 at 8:33 am to
quote:

Knows about what? A fantasy scenario ?


The relevant law. If the grand jury subpoenas the president he legally will have to appear unless Trump is prepared to forcefully assert that he's a higher authority on the law than the USSC.
Posted by DragginFly
Under the Mountain;By the Lake
Member since Oct 2014
3592 posts
Posted on 4/10/18 at 8:35 am to
Twitter June 2016
quote:

It is not enough to simply beat Trump. He must be destroyed thoroughly. His kind must not rise again.
David Plouffe - June 13, 2016
Posted by NIH
Member since Aug 2008
112552 posts
Posted on 4/10/18 at 8:37 am to
pure fantasy
Posted by TigerDoc
Texas
Member since Apr 2004
9894 posts
Posted on 4/10/18 at 8:39 am to
U.S. v. Nixon held unanimously that a court can compel production of evidence from the president. They've ruled that the President can be compelled to testify in a civil case. What reason do you have to believe they wouldn't compel testimony before the Grand Jury in a criminal case?
This post was edited on 4/10/18 at 8:40 am
Posted by NIH
Member since Aug 2008
112552 posts
Posted on 4/10/18 at 8:43 am to
He's not going to be subpoenaed by a grand jury. Put your pants back on
Posted by themunch
Earth. maybe
Member since Jan 2007
64583 posts
Posted on 4/10/18 at 8:45 am to
quote:

He'll be basically told that either he goes in and he testifies or he takes the Fifth Amendment. If he takes the Fifth Amendment, there's not a problem.
Posted by TigerDoc
Texas
Member since Apr 2004
9894 posts
Posted on 4/10/18 at 8:46 am to
So you think he'll voluntarily agree to an interview?
Posted by themunch
Earth. maybe
Member since Jan 2007
64583 posts
Posted on 4/10/18 at 8:48 am to
He should not.
Posted by Wtodd
Tampa, FL
Member since Oct 2013
67482 posts
Posted on 4/10/18 at 8:52 am to
quote:

MSNBC's Joy Reid

Is one batshit crazy libtwat
Posted by Mid Iowa Tiger
Undisclosed Secure Location
Member since Feb 2008
18579 posts
Posted on 4/10/18 at 9:17 am to
quote:

If he refuses to answer on the grounds that a truthful answer would tend to incriminate him he has the right to do that.


This part of that quote is the beginning of a whisper campaign to imply guilt for taking the fifth. Guilt is not the only reason to take the fifth. Hell, the way they set traps for slight mis-recall of an obscure fact leading to perjury charges in front of any jury ever I am tempted to only plead the fifth.

Posted by Damone
FoCo
Member since Aug 2016
32503 posts
Posted on 4/10/18 at 9:17 am to
The fact that that is even a segment on television. Yeesh.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram