Forum Thread

Hypothetical: What would happen if Trump defied a SC court order


Reply to ThreadDisplaying 16 - 22 of 22 Prev 1 2
  • wwjd
    2020-02-13 09:07:17 PM
    Not Logged In
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Bring back this topic because of the most recent news about Trump using the powers of presidency to get the results he wants in the Stone Trial. Trump current is flexing his muscle demonstrating he is not afraid to pressure the DOJ and federal courts into getting the sentence for Stone that he wants.

    The Stone case is a long way away from defying SC decision, but its an example of Trump believing he has the power to influence the outcome of any case. It is clear to him that the Republican party will not challenge anything he does because they fear him, thus his power is only kept in check by the Court of law, and if he can break throw that barrier at the lower levels of court system such as the Stone case, it will give him the green light to challenge or interfere with other cases, such as appellate cases that headed toward the SC.

    Let's say for one example, the SC rules that the president of US can not do XXX unless he gets congress's approval. And Trump does not like that SC court ruling, and states publically "The SC is wrong, therefore I will continue to do XXX without congress aproval"

  • jaredsxtn
    2020-02-14 11:37:08 AM
    Not Logged In
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    jaredsxtn Wrote: What worries me most is what happens after the Senate basically rubber stamps his treasonous behavior. All gloves will be off then.

    It's depressing that Donald is doing exactly what I thought he would do after the Senate gave him the green light to subvert our democracy.

  • Schmidt
    2020-02-16 07:02:42 PM
    Not Logged In
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    The law that 'enabled' Hitler's dictatorship

    "Eighty years ago, Germany's parliament passed the "Enabling Act." From that point on, Adolf Hitler could enact laws without the need of parliamentary approval. Only one party valiantly resisted."

    Having failed at obtaining an absolute majority of National Socialists in Germany's parliament, Hitler placed before parliament a "Law to Remedy the Distress of People and the Reich" - also called the "Enabling Act."

    The decisive sentence in the five-paragraph law read: "In addition to procedures prescribed by the constitution, laws of the Reich may also be enacted by the government of the Reich." That second clause had drastic implications. With no need for parliamentary approval, Hitler's government could enact laws and enter into agreements or alliances with other countries. Practically speaking, Germany's parliament was being asked to render itself impotent."

    "Beyond that, fundamental laws written into the Weimar constitution were now to be done away with. For citizens, constitutional guarantees would be rendered void. Granting these emergency powers to the German chancellor would endow his office with unassailable legal authority. The only thing between the chancellor and that power was the consent of two-thirds of parliament."

    "Parliament lost."

    You can read what happened in the days and months following that fateful day, March 23, 1933, at the above link, or maybe Dutch can tell you the rest of the story.

    Anyway, it cannot happen here...agree or disagree?

  • Dockadams
    2020-02-16 07:09:26 PM
    Not Logged In
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    It could happen as long as the dolts in the senate keep going along with the king. It'll be the forth Reich. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Reich

    except that instead of Germany, it'll be the USA.

  • lonely bird
    2020-02-16 09:10:49 PM
    Not Logged In
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    wwjd Wrote:

    To make the scenario more realistic. Trump could challenge the national election in the courts claiming the results are invalid due to foreign interference, thus refuses to leave office. The SC would most likely uphold the election results declaring Trump lost the election, but Trump ignores the SC ruling and he remains in the WH.

    I am not predicting that scenario will happen, and probably has less than 1% of actually happening, but I am predicting Trump will lose the election, and no matter what Trump decides to do after he has lost the 2020 election, there will not be a peaceful transition of power; he will do whatever he can to keep the spot light ALWAYS on him, in or out of office. He will refuse to accept he lost the election, and tell his base the national election was a FAKE election. Within 1-2 weeks of losing the election he will resume his rallies tour, denouncing the 2020 election results, and call upon his base to rise up against the US Government.... That is very plausible.

    Imo, your scenario is very plausible. If a couple of the states that gave him the electoral college flip this year you can bet the farm he will scream bloody murder. He is a sociopath and a psychopath with little restraint. Should the election not go his way that will make his revenge/retribution tour currently playing look like a toddler having a tantrum. The election of this clearly unfit madman in 2016 laid the foundation for a roller coaster with no brakes in 2020.
  • lonely bird
    2020-02-16 09:13:45 PM
    Not Logged In
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Schmidt Wrote:

    The law that 'enabled' Hitler's dictatorship

    "Eighty years ago, Germany's parliament passed the "Enabling Act." From that point on, Adolf Hitler could enact laws without the need of parliamentary approval. Only one party valiantly resisted."

    Having failed at obtaining an absolute majority of National Socialists in Germany's parliament, Hitler placed before parliament a "Law to Remedy the Distress of People and the Reich" - also called the "Enabling Act."

    The decisive sentence in the five-paragraph law read: "In addition to procedures prescribed by the constitution, laws of the Reich may also be enacted by the government of the Reich." That second clause had drastic implications. With no need for parliamentary approval, Hitler's government could enact laws and enter into agreements or alliances with other countries. Practically speaking, Germany's parliament was being asked to render itself impotent."

    "Beyond that, fundamental laws written into the Weimar constitution were now to be done away with. For citizens, constitutional guarantees would be rendered void. Granting these emergency powers to the German chancellor would endow his office with unassailable legal authority. The only thing between the chancellor and that power was the consent of two-thirds of parliament."

    "Parliament lost."

    You can read what happened in the days and months following that fateful day, March 23, 1933, at the above link, or maybe Dutch can tell you the rest of the story.

    Anyway, it cannot happen here...agree or disagree?

    Your thesis is predicated on an engaged electorate. Imo, again we will see less than 65% of the electorate voting will the rest abdicate their responsibility.

    It certainly can happen here. Humans are humans and Bird’s Theorem: “We The People” are stupid, rules.

  • Chet Ruminski
    2020-02-16 09:55:56 PM
    Not Logged In
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    jaredsxtn Wrote:
    Schmidt Wrote: Okay, this narrative that Trump could defy the Supreme Court is a stretch. Unlikely, but perhaps plausible. We've discussed before Trump's own analogy that he could shoot someone on 5th Avenue and get away with it. If Trump really believes that then anything is possible.

    I hate to admit it, but I think it's less of a stretch than it was before the impeachment hearings where we saw House Republicans regurgitating Russian propaganda and excusing Donald's extortion as just Trump being Trump.

    Senate Republicans aren't going to convict Donald no matter how egregious his crimes are. That is dangerous with someone like Donald who already is convinced he's above the law.

    What worries me most is what happens after the Senate basically rubber stamps his treasonous behavior. All gloves will be off then.

    I hope the complete breakdown of our Constitutional democracy was worth it for all those Bernie or busters in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania.

    “all those Bernie or busters in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania.”

    While I was saying Trump was a formidable candidate and needed to be campaigned against like he could win others were wishing he would be the candidate cause he would be wiped out.
    He is still that dangerous and formidable and needs to be looked at in those terms. He can’t do anything wrong in the eyes of his supporters.
    He will do whatever crosses his mind without regard to anything.

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 16 - 22 of 22 Prev 1 2