DeSantis: Florida won’t cooperate with Trump extradition

It's possible.

I trust the justice system.

But he's not off the hook.

There's still Georgia, the Capitol Riot, the IRS fraud, the rape trial and the secret documents he illegally brought with him.

A grand jury voted to indict Trump.

57% of Americans believe an indictment disqualifies Trump from being POTUS again.

By what miracle do you think he's going to convince 8-9 million voters that he deserves a second chance?

 

I disagree

Not one opinion will change. Democrat voters will act as if he is guilty of some crime. Supporters of the Constitution will see it as pure political play with no basis.

An NDA is an NDA.

This will give the media yet another opportunity to solidify their message to Democrat voters.

 

No down side here for Ronnie Pol Pot 2.0

 

And you are basing the bold on??

You seem to be aware you are guessing on much of this, for which I give you credit. But I can assure you that you are wrong on E. This doesn't remotely "put him in the Oval all by itself"

I truly want to meet the person who didn't vote for him in 2020 that will in 2024 because of this news... He/she will have their own chapter in a revised DSM

 

From what I understand, Trump's popularity has only risen since announcing he would be indicted. He's getting support among his rivals (Republicans - this is an opportunity for Cheney to redeem herself) and even Democrats that see this for what it really is -- a political persecution.

 

Of course it does. You want the guy in jail, and you do not care how. You don't care if he committed a crime, you don't care if he is convicted of a crime, you don't care at all how it happens, whether it violates his civil rights, or threatens others, you don't care how it happens. As long as you get your perp walk, arrest photo, and him in a cage, you don't give a $hit about anything else. But you are not alone, sadly.

Twice impeached (once with 4 days left on his term, not sure what the point of that was), twice acquitted, been investigated since before he even announced, russia, russia, russia, which we all know now was bullshit, bullshit, bullshit, an ex-President in possession of classified docs, but y'all shut up about that one rather quickly when it turned out your guy was, too, and I'm sure much, much more.

Trump is not a very nice person, but he was at least a decent President, we had economic prosperity (at least until the unexpected and unpredictable occurred), lowest black unemployment in history, but he's a racist, as is everyone who isn't a flaming left lib, he's a fascist, even though 99% of people screaming that couldn't define that word if it smacked them in the forehead, and so much more.

But you don't care. Jail him. Forever. By any and all means, legal and illegal, Constitutional and Unconstitutional, any means necessary. And if he flinches, shoot him, amirite??

I don't even like the guy, but I like what y'all are doing even less, because what y'all are trying to do will absolutely shatter centuries of precedent, jurisprudence, and our very way of life. Not just about him, but definitely including him.

By any means necessary.

 

Golly. Nancy Pelosi just went on twitter and posted this:


Nancy Pelosi@SpeakerPelosi
The Grand Jury has acted upon the facts and the law. No one is above the law, and everyone has the right to a trial to prove innocence. Hopefully, the former President will peacefully respect the system, which grants him that right.

So how do you square your glee at a grand misuse and abuse of prosecutorial power, Pelosi's demand that a trial requires you the accused to prove your innocence, and you clapping your hands? And if Ron doesn't support the extradition, whom do you suppose would make FL? Are you suggesting that the DOJ would intervene to accomplish what a political hack from NY requires? How laughable.

 

WRONG!
Overbroad and Overgeneral...
I "Support the Constitution", and I see a very strong basis for indicting Trump...

 

LOL... Nancy Pelosi tweeted her own piss on the constitution...

Nancy Pelosi@SpeakerPelosi
The Grand Jury has acted upon the facts and the law. No one is above the law, and everyone has the right to a trial to prove innocence. Hopefully, the former President will peacefully respect the system, which grants him that right.

This actually is the cr4p you folks think is ok though.

 

So, I understand why you may be so horrified by the actions of your own party. They are, sad, at best. An existential threat to the constitutional framework of the nation, and frankly, your party seems entirely willing to become the communist party of China. So, frankly, your support for the constitution is tenuous at best.

 

The amount of time it took, the who knows how many delays, and the calls from both left and right that it's the wrong thing to do.

It may be me, unfortunately. I would vote for a deceased dog, and a mean one at that, before pulling my lever to put Biden back in Command for another 4-years. Hell, I'd take the job myself, a job that I would never in a million years would have wanted, before allowing that putz to be reelected, but that's not going to happen, so, I may have no choice.

Granted, my assessment is an opinion, and I don't at all mean that some legal miracle is gonna come along that will invalidate the '20 election and magically restore him to the office, just that it's going to INFURIATE a lot of people, including people like me who don't want him to even run. Probably enough to put him over the top in the primary (and in that, I won't vote for him even if he's got it wrapped by the time Florida goes), which will probably put him over the top in the general, because, in my opinion, nothing short of a bonafide miracle is going to get Biden reelected. I keep seeing headlines that only like 25% of actual dems even want him to run, so many of them may switch teams, too. But, in the end, just one man's relatively informed opinion. Take it as you will, and consider what you paid for it.

 

Apparently the Constitution can be bypassed. Just like election laws.

 

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/Mg_albQOyvA

 

I already answered that, but I want to address the '57% think an indictment disqualifies him' part.

That 57%, many of whom are probably TDS sufferers who are just hoping that is the case, are wrong. He could be under indictment, convicted, even literally in jail, and that wouldn't disqualify him, at least not on whatever this Grand Jury voted to indict him on. If it was Treason, as defined by the Constitution, not what you might think or wish Treason was, perhaps, I don't know. But some petty ass misdemeanor, maybe stretched beyond recognition into some Frankenstein monster, where you or I would never be charged and the penalty for a first time offender is a 3-digit fine, no.

Then again, the overwhelming majority of Americans, sadly, have no clue how the Constitution or legal system works. Those of us who participate here may not always agree, and may spend years arguing about what 4 little words actually mean, but at least we know what those 4 little words are!! Most folk couldn't tell you the first thing about it. What's in the 1st Amendment? 2nd? If you really wanna know if someone has knowledge, ask 'em what's in the 3rd? (Quartering soldiers in private homes, not much of an issue these days, but still a valid and active part of the Constitution.)

Forget about the 9th and 10th.... Cripes.

Qualifications for POTUS... Age 35, natural born Citizen or Citizen at the time the Constitution was ratified, still a valid clause, but all who meet it are deceased. House or Senate? Age 25 for House, 30 for Senate, Citizen for 7 years for House, 9 for Senate. Both must live in the State they intend to represent, but House members don't have to live in their district. I think Pelosi doesn't.

But ask 100 people any of that, how many do you think will get even half of it right? One? Two? Five, maybe?? No more.

That is part of the roots of our issues, people don't know the basics. They think it's just simple to ban 'assault weapons', even though they couldn't tell you what an 'assault weapon' is to save their lives, and they don't understand the ramifications of the 2A, and wouldn't have the first clue what the word 'Bruen' had to do with it.

It's a shame, really, and partially a product of schools being more interested in teaching gender studies and sex ed to kindergarteners rather than just getting the foundations right.

 

thank you for confirming what I said about Democrat voters such as yourself, and those who support the Constitution.

What is really sad is that you think this abuse of the criminal justice system is constitutional. I am sincere when i say that I really do feel sorry for you.

 

Yes, not even McDonalds will hire people with criminal records, but POTUS, - no problem.

But thats only the legal requirements, while the voters decide who actually gets the job, and I don't think moral character is an issue anymore in the minds of a large portion of Americans.

 

None of that has anything to do with the definition and timing of fleeing, but thanks for playing the Home Version of our game...

 

Yeah, that's not technically correct.
The Orange Stain has a right to due process. He has the right to confront his accusers. He has the right to not testify against himself.

As for you claim "misuse of prosecutorial power" , that's BS. A grand jury returned a true bill on over 30 counts. The Republicans in Washington are screaming like
stuck pigs complaining about ....... what ? Due process ? I thought Republicans were law and order types. Apparently not when one of their own gets indicted.
Hypocrisy in the extreme, but no surprise.

 

I don't care what you think of them.

I know that the vast majority of MAGA's - you probably too - would vote for Trump even if he were in prison for murder.

That's not the point.

How are MAGA's going to win if 57% of Americans want Trump indicted?

This is all the more true among Republicans, who don't even understand why Trump is going through a trial.

 

That is not how the Constitution works.

 

I get were you going with this. It’s the prosecutors job to prove guilt. But do you disagree that it’s in the defense attorney’s best interest to submit evidence proving innocence? I would not sit there quiet hoping the defense failed to prove my guilt.

 

Bragg's career and misdeeds are for future review, for sure. Getting a grand jury to return given his packaging isn't difficult to understand. Put a room full of democrats who hate trump in a room, and the likely outcome is the indictment that we see today. Nancy Pelosi though suggests that Trump must "prove his innocence"... Golly. So much for her understanding of due process. And this seems to be the case for many of the top Democrats, like Schumer who said essentially the same thing.

So, let us be clear on this. If Bragg can indict a former president, what is keeping someone like the AG of Texas from indicting President Biden today? Do you agree that given the precedent that this would be appropriate?

 

It isn't? Perhaps you should tell that to all of the sanctuary cities democrats are running....

 

Do you not understand that not Ron's actions are simply unconstitutional?

 

Which is a false equivalency spawned in the bowels of hate for America.

The bit regarding extradition is in the Constitution.