US Elections 2020

[broncofan]

I asked you before, Broncomaniac, Attorney at Law, I guess it got lost in the shuffle-
If Mueller found solid evidence of Trump's involvement with money laundering and Russian Oligarchs, would that be sent to New York for possible prosecution after he's out of office?
And could Bill Barr snuff it?
I want Republicans to see Trump for who he really is. I want him in jail.

As a postscript, I think me and this forum committed the ultimate sin, we got old.

He can be prosecuted depending on the statute of limitations. I don't know whether the statute of limitations "tolls", meaning that it doesn't run during the period of his presidency. It would make sense to me that it would. Statutes of limitation are intended to preclude undue delay by the prosecution and also to allow a defendant the opportunity to put up a defense while the evidence is still fresh. The first purpose at least weighs in favor of tolling the statute since the prosecutors are not constitutionally permitted to prosecute while he's president.

Barr would not be AG once he's out of office. Could a Republican AG in another administration do something to bury it? Yes, but he or she would be risking his neck if he instructed U.S. Attorneys not to investigate or prosecute serious crimes.

It can also be prosecuted at the state level. The Attorney General could not do anything about that. Also, the next President's pardon would not reach state crimes since only federal crimes can be pardoned. I only skimmed this old politico piece but it said something about federal crimes and statutes of limitation so it's possibly useful!

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/06/06/how-trump-could-be-prosecuted-after-the-white-house-227050

[broncofan]

I follow Mariotti, the politico piece's author on twitter. He's a very good lawyer. He seems to think the only realistic way is if Trump loses in 2020. He doubts the statute of limitations would be tolled during the Trump Presidency and says that many of the federal crimes have a five year s.o.l. He also mentions the possibility of state level crimes, which he would have a harder time wriggling out of with a pardon.

As to the rest of your post. Yes, things are a bit slower on here but it picks up every once in a while!

[buttslinger]

Thanks, Councilor, good article.
I heard some gossip that Trump himself might implicate Pence in the Ukraine booboo, so Republican Senators won't put Nancy Pelosi in the White House. Stranger things have happened.
I don't want Trump to burn for obstruction, I personally thought Bill Clinton should have obstructed that partisan weasel dick Ken Starr. I want undeniable truth that Trump laundered millions of dollars with Putin's best buddies. I want to shove that right down the throat of every well-meaning but delusional person that stood beside him through thick and thin. I want undeniable truth that everything CNN and MSNBC and every legitimate news service said about him was true. Clear as a bell. I want the Murdoch Boys to drop their aiding and abetting prime time line-up like a hot potato. All this beyond fucked up shit started with Fox News.
In my Opinion.

[broncofan]

Thanks, Councilor, good article.

If these past couple years have shown me anything it's that while I would never insist someone call me Counsellor or Esquire or anything else, I'm pretty sure I don't want to be called Councilor, even if you mean Counsellor. My pedantry is not for nothing on this one.

[broncofan]

I don't want Trump to burn for obstruction, I personally thought Bill Clinton should have obstructed that partisan weasel dick Ken Starr.

More quibbling. I find much to agree with but I have to mention this. First, one should play ball even with a politically motivated special prosecutor. Second, Trump was not just protecting himself from embarrassment when he began a long sequence of acts intended to interfere with the Justice Department's ability to investigate Russian cybercrimes. At the time he obstructed justice the target of the investigation was Michael Flynn who had undeniably broken the law.

You want it to be something more than what Clinton did and it was, even before he solicited Ukraine he prevented law enforcement and prosecutors in the Justice Department from being able to investigate crimes that undermined our electoral process. He threatened reprisal against at least four individuals who were just doing their jobs.

Sorry to interfere with the thread. Go Warren or something...whoever's the nominee has my support.

[filghy2]

Back on topic, Joe, Bernie, and Pocahontas are all in their 70s. That's not good.

It may not be ideal, but Trump is also in his 70s, so it shouldn't be a disadvantage. Elizabeth Warren definitely looks the healthiest of those four. Women live about 5 years longer than men on average, so that's not surprising.

[filghy2]

I'm not impressed by Biden and she is a good candidate.

I'm not sure what Biden is running on, other than the fact that he was Obama's deputy. He strikes me as a bit of professional hedger who won't take a position until he sees which way the wind is blowing.

[broncofan]

He strikes me as a bit of professional hedger who won't take a position until he sees which way the wind is blowing.

I agree. He's running on the idea of electability, but as an end in itself it's uninspiring. A part of me likes the pragmatism because about half of what's wrong with Trump is character. But it also tells the right that if they elect an absolute nutjob we'll compromise many of our goals just to have someone sane in the whitehouse.

[broncofan]

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/05/thes...-for-2020.html

Here are some of Warren's taxing and spending plans. It's much more ambitious than anything I've found on Biden's website. Biden talks about protecting and expanding the Affordable Care Act, but I think we should move to Medicare for all. The affordable care act was an improvement at the time but I think people are ready for a system closer to what is found in other countries. I also like the idea of a wealth tax and a tax on lobbying.

I trust her a lot more on financial regulatory matters than Sanders too. I'm going to read more about it in the next week but I actually trust her to go after corrupt practices by private equity funds, hedge funds, and banks without destroying our financial system.

[buttslinger]

Sorry counsel-type guy, sorry everybody, I am going through a serious rough patch of late. I think my point about Trump is those well meaning people need to be shaken down to their well meaning roots, or else Trump and these last three years are going to go down in the books as 100% negative. Maybe 200% I'm not even sure if I want Trump impeached if the payoff is Pence. As for the age thing, I'm going to vote for whoever the Dems put up.
When my Mom worked in the Pentagon, word raced through the building that JFK was there. Of course everybody ran out into the halls. He had just got back from vacation and he was tanned and rested, and my Mom said just watching him walk down the hall with his entourage behind him, as all the employees stood in admiration was quite a sight. She also said he was a tall glass of water, or something like that.