I am old and not long for this world. There are a few things I would very much like to see before I shuffle off and one of them is Donald Trump being led away in handcuffs to prison. It is not too much to ask, is it?
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
A Commentary on the Passing Scene by Robert Paul Wolff rwolff@afroam.umass.edu
My Stuff
https://umass-my.sharepoint.com/:f:/g/personal/rwolff_umass_edu/EkxJV79tnlBDol82i7bXs7gBAUHadkylrmLgWbXv2nYq_A?e=UcbbW0
Coming Soon:
The following books by Robert Paul Wolff are available on Amazon.com as e-books: KANT'S THEORY OF MENTAL ACTIVITY, THE AUTONOMY OF REASON, UNDERSTANDING MARX, UNDERSTANDING RAWLS, THE POVERTY OF LIBERALISM, A LIFE IN THE ACADEMY, MONEYBAGS MUST BE SO LUCKY, AN INTRODUCTION TO THE USE OF FORMAL METHODS IN POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY.
Now Available: Volumes I, II, III, and IV of the Collected Published and Unpublished Papers.
Now Available: Volumes I, II, III, and IV of the Collected Published and Unpublished Papers.
NOW AVAILABLE ON YOUTUBE: LECTURES ON KANT'S CRITIQUE OF PURE REASON. To view the lectures, go to YouTube and search for "Robert Paul Wolff Kant." There they will be.
NOW AVAILABLE ON YOUTUBE: LECTURES ON THE THOUGHT OF KARL MARX. To view the lectures, go to YouTube and search for Robert Paul Wolff Marx."
Total Pageviews
Search This Blog
Philosopher's Stone
Blog Archive
-
▼
2022
(209)
-
▼
July
(17)
- A MARVELOUS LINK
- MORE COURSE PREP
- WELL, SO WE WON'T ALWAYS HAVE PARIS
- BUCKET LIST
- COURSE PREP
- 😉
- PROBLEMS, PROBLEMS
- MY ZELIG MOMENT
- THANK YOU, ACHIM KRIECHEL
- KEEPING ON KEEPING ON
- COMIC RELIEF
- DICKENSIAN WISDOM
- MEMORIES
- ADVERTISEMENTS FOR MYSELF
- I SAW IT ON THE TV
- I HEREBY DECLARE THIS CHALLENGE CLOSED
- LAST CHANCE
-
▼
July
(17)
About Me
- Robert Paul Wolff
- As I observed in one of my books, in politics I am an anarchist, in religion I am an atheist, and in economics I am a Marxist. I am also, rather more importantly, a husband, a father, a grandfather, and a violist.
21 comments:
I expect his strongest defense would be competence. Hearing his lawyers arguing that would be sweet.
No, it is not too much to ask, but it’s going to take a while.
The length of time between indictment, preliminary hearing, bond hearing, and a trial that will be able to avoid seating jurors who are Trumpists who will cause a hung jury will be at least 16 months. If there is a hung jury, it could take several trials until a conviction is unanimous. Even if convicted, can he avoid prison while he exhausts his appeals, which could last another 2-3 years.
I will be satisfied just to see him sitting in the defendant’s chair.
My wife and I were talking about this at dinner. Assume Trump is tried, convicted, and sent to prison. By law, he is entitled to Secret Service protection for life. How would that work? Would the agents have to go with him to the clink?
It might not be difficult to find a jury with no Trumpies. If DOJ indicts him, the trial would be in the US District Court for the District of Columbia, the site of the crime--and a lonely, lonely venue if you're a Trumpie. In Georgia, if indicted by the State authorities, I believe he would be tried in Atlanta
Given that GP would be impossible and ad-seg unworkable, I'd assume some arrangement like the one for Frank Pentangeli on some military base.
On reflection there are other possibilities:
Trump has two golf courses in Indonesia and I don't believe there is an extradition treaty. At least at one of his rallies during the campaign h mentioned leaving the country if he lost.
Given Russian concerns over Viktor Bout, it seems that Putin has at least a primitive sense of loyalty. If Trump was convicted perhaps an exchange with an American prisoner could be arranged. Perhaps Khrushchev's dacha is available.
David,
I earnestly, as much as anyone who reads this blog, want to see Trump, aka Il Duce, tried, convicted and imprisoned. But we cannot disregard or minimize the difficulties involved, which are contributing to the length of time Garland is taking to get the DOJ’s ducks in order. Regarding your point, Trump’s lawyers would undoubtedly file a motion for change of venue. It would be very difficult for a judge in D.C., or Atlanta, to deny such a motion; denial would have the appearance of bias or partisanship. Trump’s lawyers would move to have the trial transferred to a Red State, e.g., Indiana, Idaho, or even Ohio. That would make it much more difficult to keep Trumpists off the jury. The prosecution can only oppose such a motion, but cannot bring a change of venue motion itself – that would violate Trump’s 5th Amendment rights.
Post-script:
Even if indicted by the Georgia A.G., a change of venue from Atlanta would undoubtedly be granted, and the trial would be transferred to a rural part of the state. This is also true if he is indicted by the N.Y. AG – he will not be tried in NYC or Albany. His lawyers will have the trial moved to a rural part of N.Y.
Post-post-script:
An instructive historical note regarding change of venue. Dutch Schultz (Arhur Simon Fiegenheimer) was a major mobster in the Jewish mafia during the 1920s-1930s, with operations in New York and New Jersey. He and Lucky Luciano were adversaries. Thomas Dewey, the U.S. attorney for New York, indicted Shultz for tax evasion. The first trial, held in Syracuse, ended in a hung jury. Dewey then re-indicted Schultz for jury tampering. Schultz’s lawyers succeeded in having the next trial transferred to a rural town in N.Y., Malone, where Schultz went about town charming the townspeople, giving money to charities and toys to sick children (can’t you see Trump doing this?) The strategy worked – he was acquitted. Fiorello La Guadia was so incensed, that he issued an order for Schultz to be arrested on sight if he returned to NYC. Schultz transferred his operation to Newark, N.J. – where he was ultimately assassinated by Luciano, because he was in the process of arranging for Dewey’s assassination, a move which was opposed by the Italian mafia – bad for business.
E.L. Doctorow wrote a superb novel about Schultz, “Billy Bathgate.” The opening passage of the novel, which portrays Schultz arranging to have a snitch fitted with a pair of cement shoes, is hair-raising. The novel was made into a movie by the same name. Schultz was portrayed by --- Dustin Hoffman (not quite convincing as a ruthless killer).
Correction:
Schultz’s real surname was Flegenheimer. His parents were German Jewish immigrants.
Marc,
All your points are valid, but you miss the point I raised: what happens if he's imprisoned? What does the Secret service do? Showing that there are many roadblocks to that occuring doesn't address the one I raised, half, if not mostly, in humor.
Marc, David and other lawyers,
I'm not sure how the jury selection process exactly works, and maybe you can fill me in.
Aren't jurors supposed to have an open mind as to the guilt or innocence of the person accused of a crime until they hear the evidence presented in the trial?
That is, not only should Trumpists be excluded from the jury, but also people like Professor Wolff who states above that he wants to see Trump in handcuffs on his way to prison.
If that is the case, it's going to be hard to find a jury without preconceptions about Trump's guilt or innocence.
David,
If Trump is convicted, I am confident (without doing the legal research to find the statute) he will thereby have forfeited his right to Secret Service protections. Even if this is not the case, the Secret Service would not be required to be in the cell with him. Taxpayers would be paying them to sit with the prison guards and play gin rummy.
s. wallerstein,
As to your last sentence, yes, exctly.
"Supposed to" - yes, "supposed to." But potential jurors lie all the time to conceal their biases. Grischam wrote a pretty good novel about that - The Runaway Jury." Potential jurors are not subjected to a polygraph test. There is no way to determine whether a potential juror is being honest and candid. Moreover, Trump's lawyers will likely hire a company whose personnel are experts in jury selection, experts who can analyze body language, gestures, etc., to find jurors who would be more likely favorable to Trump.
Marc,
These days people with strong political opinions are likely to express them in social media,
Twitter, Instagram, Facebook or in blogs like this one.
I imagine that lawyers for both sides will carefully analyze the social media of possible jurors.
Donald J. Trump will never spend a day in jail. His MAGA base is still too strong and I suspect many Americans are uncomfortable with locking up an ex-president. Personally, I would like to see him locked away in a tiny cell, as one sees on all the TV prison series, with his presidential seal plastered everywhere, a Saudi orb, and his Trump Tower gold toilet. Or if the powers that be were creative, take the same cell, put it in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, with a big sign outside the installation that reads LOSER.
As a Canadian, I watch Trump with great horror and do not think that he will ever be jailed, arrested, or even handcuffed and walked in front of the cameras because the American legal system is too flawed to catch Trump and treat him like a common criminal.
That won't be Trump's fate or the end of his political story, but there are many other ways in which the public can inflict pain and gain some degree of justice which lie outside the legal system and its flaws. These acts of vigilante justice are to be expected due to Trump's greasy escape from all legal prosecution, he will get "underworld justice" instead. What forms might that take?
From teaching animal ethics, I know about a particular case called "The Siege of Darley Oaks Farm" in a BBC journalism report. Vigilante activists dug up and kidnapped the recently buried mother-in-law of the Darley Oaks guinea pig farm owners, and stole her body by hiding it some where else. Anti-Trump activists could dig up the body of Trump family members such as Ivana (recently buried at Trump's New Jersey golf course in a special plot), or others. Monkeywrenching protestors could figure out ways to destroy his golf courses, real estate or other businesses by unpredictable and uncivil protests of all kinds.
The American legal system cannot manage its Donald Trump problem, so the anarchy of the American public activists stepping up their protest game to inflict pain on Trump and his businesses in any way they can is more likely than ever seeing Trump led away in handcuffs. Trump does not believe in the rule of law but rather in the opposite private rule by men of business over their employees and the public at large. So he will never be dealt with by legal and civil means of punishment, it is Trump's fate instead to be taken down by monkeywrenching and boycotts and social sabotage of all things Trump. The end of Donald Trump will be more like the end of Ivana Trump falling down her circular stairs because she was too proud to take her elevator, except the speeches at his funeral by his children will be more controversial than Ivana's service. Trump glimpsed a preview of his own end at Ivana's funeral, but imagine his own State funeral with all the Presidential ceremony while all the lawyers in America choke on their rules of law which could not stop an outlaw from becoming President. The "long arm" of the law will never stop Trump from leaving America if necessary, perhaps buying his own islands or refuge for retirement in the Caribbean.
The SS is "authorized" to protect the president under the direction of the Secretary of the Homeland Security Department. There is a uniformed division of the SS. Perhaps some lucky duckies in that division get tasked with that duty.
Given his age and the CARES Act, trump could be sentenced to home confinement and fitted with an ankle monitor. The Uniformed SS folks would effectively become correctional officers. Perhaps that could be conditioned with the detainee not charging the government for their board and keep.
Also the president could decide that a trial, conviction, and sentence were enough to make the point and commute the sentence to some minimum or completely. Unlike with a pardon the conviction would stand.
A wild card is the time line Marc has referenced. Still with Maniford and now with Bannon it seems the Feds can move quickly. If the venue was changed it would have to be to a district that could carry the burden.
s.w., the folks jury consultants Trump will hire will make bank.
aaall,
I had to google "make bank". I'm not very up-to-date on U.S. informal speech.
This segment is from a British TV series of 1977-78 where Magee interviews 15 well known philosophers. One of more interesting to me was the interview with Charles Taylor who defends Marx and explains the Manuscripts to Magee. However, whenever I find that particular segment, Magee and Taylor are dubbed in Russian - unfortunately. The book that emerged from the series and which was a transcript of all the interviews was called The Men of Ideas.
How would Kant see US politics and politicians. Neither the Republic nor the Democrat are truthful. Both have severe flaws. This is demonstrated in recent and present presidents.
Lect 2. 2016 Kant. I have seen in Kant, writing in 18th ce, Kant is proving the existance of 'Gd' through a negative, and hidden arguement. Most believe Kant was a Protestant, but secretly his ancestors were Jewish, so Jewish intellectual morals and ethics are behind , hidden, in his arguments. Proving the positive through a negative argument. I just found your lectures on YouTube. Thank you
Post a Comment