Ball-gag put on Trump

[Dutch Uncle]

Just as trump immediately began testing the limits of his powers as POTUS, including the bilking of the taxpayers for his own gain, he's in the same spot now.

The Founders never dreamed that an incompetent moron would ever be POTUS, so there is a need to redefine the parameters of the office.

Including how to deal with a POTUS who is a criminal. The Founders always assumed that an honorable man would be the leader of the nation. And I do mean 'man'.

What parameters would you redifine?

There are procedures for criminal office holders. Specifically impeachment. The problem isn't the procedures, but the fact the nation is so evenly divided between two extremes. Consider the current fiasco in the House for an example.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

He will be allowed to speak in his own defense, in the Courtroom where one is allowed to do so.

Agreed. The wife-beating Down Under dumbass is a fucking moron. Too bad his wife doesn't have brothers; they could teach him a few manners in civility and personal accountability.

 

[Althea]

What parameters would you redifine?

There are procedures for criminal office holders. Specifically impeachment. The problem isn't the procedures, but the fact the nation is so evenly divided between two extremes. Consider the current fiasco in the House for an example.

The Founders also believed that the men of Congress would be similarly honorable, putting the needs of the nation before their own personal aspirations.

Of course, they were all crooks back then too.

For starters, I would codify into law the ability to criminally prosecute a sitting POTUS if necessary. It seems the language is vague, and a corrupt DOJ will keep a criminal in office.

I would extend the emoluments clause to include POTUS, which right now seems to be missing.

 

[ExpressLane]

Judge imposes gag order on Donald Trump in D.C. trial

Judge Tanya Chutkan said Trump’s “presidential candidacy does not give him carte blanche to vilify … public servants who are simply doing their job.”

Isn't this great! We can deny Trump freedom of speech! If they can deny Trump they can do the same thing for you!!! How exciting!!! <sarcasm>

I thought we had the presumption of innocence. Remind me now why are were denying someone who is presumed innocent the 1st amendment right to freedom of speech. Did the Democrats finally burn the Constitution or something?

BTW: Trump has the Constitutional right to opine on public servants whether they are doing a good job or not. In fact public servants jobs SHOULD be exposed for all to see. It is MORE important that we see and discuss the jobs public servants are doing. That is what transparency is about.

 

[Noking]

Maybe Trump is being muzzled for his own good.

 

[QP!]

Isn't this great! We can deny Trump freedom of speech! If they can deny Trump they can do the same thing for you!!! How exciting!!! <sarcasm>

I thought we had the presumption of innocence. Remind me now why are were denying someone who is presumed innocent the 1st amendment right to freedom of speech. Did the Democrats finnally burn the Constitution or something?

You have that backwards.

The legal system has ALWAYS restricted the rights of people who are indicted so you are arguing for an exemption for Trump.

The legal system, when you indicted has the right to jail you pending your trial, but MAY release you if you agree to certain restriction, no other innocent person would have to agree to.

Freedom of movement, freedom of association, freedom of speech, amongst others HAVE ALWAYS been restricted by those indicted so what you are saying is that there should be a Trump exception.

 

[ExpressLane]

Maybe Trump is being muzzled for his own good.

Trump has the Constitutional right to decide what is good for him and what is not. He does not need Big Brother government doing it for him.

 

[ExpressLane]

You have that backwards.

The legal system has ALWAYS restricted the rights of people who are indicted so you are arguing for an exemption for Trump.

The legal system, when you indicted has the right to jail you pending your trial, but MAY release you if you agree to certain restriction, no other innocent person would have to agree to.

Freedom of movement, freedom of association, freedom of speech, amongst others HAVE ALWAYS been restricted by those indicted so what you are saying is that there should be a Trump exception.

Presumption of innocence . What do you not understand.

 

[ExpressLane]

Presumption of innocence . What do you not understand.

The Forefathers gave us the 1st amendment because it is the MOST important right. What is next ? Should we gag Trump from speaking to defend himself in court? I can hear the Libratards you now screaming YES! Trump has the God given right to speak and the Constitution holds it to be the most important right that anyone has.

 

[Jarod]

The first Amendment does.

I think Biden's lawyer just punched Der Tar Baby.

Her attempt to deny civil rights to her victim pushes this into the lap of the SCOTUS. Not what the Biden Regime really wants.

None of our rights are absolute, people can be put in prison and Lose almost all rights. Trump is on his way, and on your way you lose some rights.

 

[QP!]

Presumption of innocence . What do you not understand.

What do you not understand.

EVERY PERSON who is indicted has a presumption of innocence and yet EVERY PERSON STILL faces a bunch of restrictions that those not indicted do not.

How is this all new to you? How can you be so incredibly stupid that you do not know these people 'presumed innocent' still are forced to hand over their passport, not cross State lines, not speak to other co defendants and on and on and on despite the 'presumption of innocence'?


This is why i keep telling you derps to shut up and not speak on topics you know nothing about. This is common knowledge to anyone, not stupid that when you get indicted you temporarily lose right until your trial is held.

this has been upheld by the SC as Constitutional.

What you are arguing for is an exemption for Trump. For him to be treated different than everyone else.

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

Trump has been a 'First' for a lot of bad shit:
First president to not concede after losing an election
First president to not attend his successor's inauguration
First president to be indicted
First president to foment an insurrection against the government
First president to be guilty of rape
First president to be guilty of defrauding a children's charity
First president to suggest injecting disinfectant

I'm sure I missed some. Please feel free to add some more

First president to deliberately take classified materials, share their contents with unauthorized foreign and domestic ppl, and get charged with violating the Espionage Act.

So much winning.

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

The Forefathers gave us the 1st amendment because it is the MOST important right. What is next ? Should we gag Trump from speaking to defend himself in court? I can hear the Libratards you now screaming YES! Trump has the God given right to speak and the Constitution holds it to be the most important right that anyone has.

Social media and the Toadstool's Nazi rally podiums are not "court," Angus.

What's a "Libratard"? A stupid person born in October?

 

[Jarod]

First president to deliberately take classified materials, share their contents with unauthorized foreign and domestic ppl, and get charged with violating the Espionage Act.

So much winning.

First president. Criminally charged with obstruction of justice. Now he’s trying to get the job of being head of the justice department.

 

[Noking]

Trump has the Constitutional right to decide what is good for him and what is not. He does not need Big Brother government doing it for him.

That is true for a normal person, but in Trump's case, it's for his own good.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

The Founders also believed that the men of Congress would be similarly honorable, putting the needs of the nation before their own personal aspirations.

Of course, they were all crooks back then too.

For starters, I would codify into law the ability to criminally prosecute a sitting POTUS if necessary. It seems the language is vague, and a corrupt DOJ will keep a criminal in office.

I would extend the emoluments clause to include POTUS, which right now seems to be missing.

Disagreed on crooks, but they were primarily rich white guys too.

Not a lawyer, but in today's highly toxic Congressional environment, I doubt they'd agree to indict a child-raping murderer based upon the letter after their name.

Agreed about emoluments, but my understanding is that those laws exist (except for SCOTUS) but are not enforced.

 

[Jarod]

The Forefathers gave us the 1st amendment because it is the MOST important right. What is next ? Should we gag Trump from speaking to defend himself in court? I can hear the Libratards you now screaming YES! Trump has the God given right to speak and the Constitution holds it to be the most important right that anyone has.

So once caught, but before trial a serial killer should be free, without bond?

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Social media and the Toadstool's Nazi rally podiums are not "court," Angus.

What's a "Libratard"? A stupid person born in October?

Coming from ExLax, I'm guessing it's anyone who doesn't snort HCQ or use Ivermectin suppositories.

 

[Joe Capitalist]

First president to deliberately take classified materials, share their contents with unauthorized foreign and domestic ppl, and get charged with violating the Espionage Act.

So much winning.

Of course. How could I forget.

And here's another:
Trump added more debt ($6 trillion) in four years than any other president.

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

Of course. How could I forget.

And here's another:
Trump added more debt ($6 trillion) in four years than any other president.

True. Plus he indirectly caused thousands of unnecessary deaths during the pandemic by lying about it, downplaying its seriousness, and refusing to wear a mask and practice social distancing.