Ok ok we fucking get it, US government. Trump is clearly above the law.
this post was submitted on 12 Nov 2023
456 points (95.6% liked)
politics
19096 readers
3736 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
All we can say with certainty is he gets special treatment, well beyond what any other nobody-defendant would receive. If he avoids all charges in his growing number of cases, then I'm with you that the evidence clearly indicates he is indeed above the law.
That’s close to the same law they indicted Hunter Biden on.
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Narrator: … and nothing continued to happen.
It makes me less sad when I imagine this came from a Douglas Adams book.
I thought this was some sort of weeks old story being posted....
But is the gun that he's selling the same gun he "totally did not buy, we swear"
https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2023/09/25/donald-trump-gun-glock/70965018007/
Edit: perhaps not https://www.meidastouch.com/news/exclusive-trump-gun-auctioned-off-at-mar-a-lago-likely-violation-of-indictment-release
18 USC § 922 (d)(1)
(d) It shall be unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person, including as a juvenile
(1) is under indictment for, or has been convicted in any court of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year
For those wondering.
EDIT: This is incorrect. It is 18 USC § 922 (n) as indicated by my reply to @Neato and thanks to them for pointing out my error.
Doesn't that just say you can't sell a gun to someone under indictment. Not the other way around?
You're right, it's 18 USC § 922 (n) that covers the other way around.
(n) It shall be unlawful for any person who is under indictment for a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year to ship or transport in interstate or foreign commerce any firearm or ammunition or receive any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.
I totally got ahead of myself pasting the related law. Thank you for your keen eyes.
This is probably a legal nothingburger.
It's a big deal if Trump was personally selling the gun. But it's almost certainly for sale by a corporation, or other legal fiction, that he owns or has an interest in. This is one reason we have the idea of a corporation. The corporation is a "person", not the CEO, board of directors, etc. and can't be held accountable, as a whole, for the actions of a single man. I know that sounds corrupt as hell, but how would you like to lose your job, or be held legally accountable for the actions of your superiors?
And if you don't like it, and I mostly don't, I invite you to read the first section of the US Code.
"In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, unless the context indicates otherwise-, bla, bla, bla,
the words "person" and "whoever" include corporations, companies, associations, firms, partnerships, societies, and joint stock companies, as well as individuals;"
Guys, I doubt he listed the thing on eBay under his personal account. Feel me?
IANAL, so I hope someone more educated than I has an angle to nail him on this. I'll take every coffin nail I can get on this man.
His Corp is under fraud indictment in NY.
Just piling on all the shitty and questionable things he does is helpful at least to promote awareness of same.
Maybe. But was it registered to him? He has to transfer that right? That probably still counts.
Ah, I see you’re under the impression that Florida requires firearm registration. While that would seem like a sensible measure, they do not.
There should still be a federal background check form (ATF form 4473) listing the seller and the buyer. If he bought it entirely on a private sale, then that form can be bypassed, but that also means he didn't buy it under his corporation.
I did not know that. I am sadly not surprised.
There's no gun registration in Florida, and it's illegal to have a registration list.
Most states don't have any registration requirements.
Literally looser gun laws than the Wild West. Pure insanity.
God Bless the NRA! /s
Liberals: "The Christo-fascists are coming!"
Well, yeah. They're already here and they're talking violence. Hell, the FBI already counts rightwing violence as their #1 threat.
Liberals: "We need a government registry of who owns what guns!"
Like an "undesirables" list? Count me out.
That was my thought. We know from statements made directly by trump that he purchased the gun relatively recently. Was it ever actually in his name? Based on the forms that I've had to fill out for purchasing both rifles and handguns, make it explicitly clear purchasing a gun for someone else isn't cool. If it can be proven that someone else bought the gun for him, or he bought it with the intention of selling it, he can end up in more hot water. At the moment, it can be assumed either of those happened, but it can't be proven.
Rock solid point there! Regardless of who's selling it, who's was it to begin with? Hadn't looked at that angle.
It's been brought to my attention through other comments here that Florida may not have the same registration as my home state. I'm pretty sure the form is a federal form though, or at least the background check required is federal. I'm not sure if an open investigation/indictment would show on those compared to something someone was tried and found guilty of. For where I'm at, the only way to transfer a handgun without registering it is if it were to go from parent to child, or vice versa.
Either way, I'm happy to see another twig on the fire under his dumbass, but I do like my guns and I really hope this doesn't get twisted into something to fuck that up more
If that was a valid workaround, couldn't any criminal just create corporations to own their guns?
Well, yeah? We do it daily.
Say I want a suppressor. OK, there's some weird legal shit here.
I can do the paperwork and pay my $200. That can is only good for that particular gun, and only as long as I own it.
So I create a trust, another legal fiction like a corporation, and put the gun inside that trust. Yes, it's a legal "bucket", kinda like a corporation. (That's really sloppy, but you get the idea.)
Now I can pass the trust onto my heirs, and they get to keep the gun/suppressor combo.
Yes, it's really that dumb. And yes, it works that way.
So does that help for Trump's situation? I saw ATF rule 41f closed some loopholes around NFA items by requiring background checks on people using trusts to receive NFA weapons, but does it help with plain old pistols too, if a natural person isn't allowed to have them?
He's again violated his conditions of release.
Among the agreed-upon conditions, Trump must not violate any laws in Georgia or elsewhere, he must appear in court as directed, he must not communicate about the facts of the case with fellow co-defendants – except through his legal team – and he must not intimidate co-defendants or witnesses. The order stipulates that such intimidation – “no direct or indirect threat of any nature” – includes posts on social media or reposts of posts made by others on social media.
Revoke
Another thing that won't be punished. It was a perfect auction.
Best auction in the history of auctions!
Trump sucks. Tell me something I didn’t already know 10 years ago
It's interesting, isn't it, that this and other "witch hunts" keep turning up so many witches.
Why would the law apply to the anointed one? The right thinks no one should hold baby hands to account for anything.
If they were going to go after this, he’d already be gone after when he handled the trump Glock in that gunstore
I’m choosing to believe maybe they want to convict him first, then hit him with the gun charge as more salt in the wound.
Or use the gun charge if they can’t nail him on anything else. What’s the maximum sentence for that?
Looks like up to 10 years, but this is from 2013 so it could be different now:
https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/usao-ut/legacy/2013/06/03/guncard.pdf
At the top, 922 (n).
This is my shocked face when nothing comes of this... :-/
I thought the story was that he never actually accepted this firearm, but here it is in his possession. Who filled out the 4473 for this?
So… basically, this can be worded as: “Trump lives another day.”
Nothing's gonna happen
Nothing ever does...
Glock will sell for more.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Pictures circulating on social media show the gun being presented at the auction, with news website Meidas Touch saying that bidding for the item began at $10,000.
Meidas Touch says that Trump was present at the auction last weekend, with video stills and pictures of him smiling and socializing being published in its report.
Dave Aronberg, the state attorney for Palm Beach County, Florida, told Meidas Touch that Trump could land himself in even more legal jeopardy if the gun can be proved to belong to the former president.
"These unanswered questions could lead to a criminal investigation, and prosecutors could ask the court to decide whether this violates Trump's pre-trial release.
"The defendant either purchased a gun in violation of the law and his conditions of release, or seeks to benefit from his supporters' mistaken belief that he did so," the court filing read.
"It would be a separate federal crime, and thus a violation of the defendant's conditions of release, for him to purchase a gun while this felony indictment is pending."
The original article contains 729 words, the summary contains 174 words. Saved 76%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
So it's either trump committed a felony or someone fraudulently said it's his.