Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
44 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
If your wondering why Trudeau flew to Florida to meet with Trump... (Original Post) Swede Nov 30 OP
That's a damn shame! Dem4life1234 Nov 30 #1
The founders never imagined this situation. COL Mustard Dec 1 #7
I admit I'm a bit ignorant of the law Dem4life1234 Dec 1 #9
Unfortunately Article II of the Constitution establishes who can be President. COL Mustard Dec 1 #11
Absolutely! Dem4life1234 Dec 1 #15
The reality melm00se Dec 1 #35
Turns out, Nixon actually had it right !!!!!!!!!!! DENVERPOPS Dec 1 #22
The Democratic party has always let them get away with it... RhapsodyFav Dec 1 #37
This! Dem4life1234 Dec 1 #39
Trump will only go to Russia when summoned. 33taw Nov 30 #2
Trump is considered "criminally inadmissible" to Canada, but he could apply for a "parole" of that status. C0RI0LANUS Nov 30 #3
i googled and this was the a.i. response: orleans Dec 1 #40
Thank you for the clarification, orleans. The TRP sounds like the "parole" term I used. C0RI0LANUS Dec 1 #42
Oh Canada! SNAP! IzzaNuDay Nov 30 #4
It is true. I Googled it and posted a couple of times. Canada isn't the only country, either Deuxcents Nov 30 #5
Yeah, but they let Bush and Cheney in. LisaM Nov 30 #6
Is a DUI a felony though? Polybius Dec 1 #24
I mostly remember that they wouldn't let you in Canada if you had one. LisaM Dec 1 #27
As much as I can't stand drinking and driving, a forever ban seems a bit extreme Polybius Dec 1 #29
The orange one brought the ring to Biden to kiss. That's called professional courtesy. Hotler Dec 1 #8
... ancianita Dec 1 #10
Thank you Unwind Your Mind Dec 1 #12
Absolutely. The facts should be known and shared. ancianita Dec 1 #13
I'll add my thanks to the above. The vilification of Garland has always struck me as loonacy. EarnestPutz Dec 1 #14
Empty Wheel? msfiddlestix Dec 1 #16
What about it? You got fact based info from them? If so, please post it. ancianita Dec 1 #17
Not I. Just checking my gut impression. I had got a "hit" you might be connected. msfiddlestix Dec 1 #20
I see. Well, I do have Empty Wheel bookmarked, for sure. ancianita Dec 1 #21
Well that leaves DOJ and AG off the hook, then. So all we have to do is blame our outdated Constitution msfiddlestix Dec 1 #19
The Garland DOJ did its job, so why should it even be on the hook? There's WAY more evidence that it shouldn't be at all ancianita Dec 1 #23
"Nov 18 2022 Garland appoints Jack Smith" Polybius Dec 1 #25
Thanks for that timeline BDavinciNY Dec 1 #34
+1, Garland ***COULD HAVE*** assigned an SC first day in office knowing J6 could've been a big deal that involved MAGA uponit7771 Dec 1 #43
Makes total sense. Emile Dec 1 #18
It's funny, but it's just trump being himself and enjoying making people squirm and sit at his feet. C Moon Dec 1 #26
No joke! elleng Dec 1 #28
I just figured that those Trumpists' wives were thirsty for him, and demanded a meet. LudwigPastorius Dec 1 #30
Well, probably since the five eyes monitor international phone calls, Trudeau did not want anyone else to know what he LiberalArkie Dec 1 #31
Message auto-removed Name removed Dec 1 #32
"You're" wondering. Spelled correctly in the tweet. Maru Kitteh Dec 1 #33
Ha! Beautiful! Joinfortmill Dec 1 #36
Bullshit. Under Canadian law, if the government opts to allow him to enter the country, he can enter the country onenote Dec 1 #38
stop it! you're spoiling the magic of the moment orleans Dec 1 #41
I think it was intended as humor. nt Xipe Totec Dec 1 #44

Dem4life1234

(2,040 posts)
1. That's a damn shame!
Sat Nov 30, 2024, 09:01 PM
Nov 30

A damn shame the model of the world has a felon as a leader. Unacceptable. Embarrassing.

Immoral as hell.

I hope Trudeau stood up to the felon like President Sheinbaum did.

One would think that would have been in the Constitution to never allow a criminal to lead the country. Ugh.

COL Mustard

(7,037 posts)
7. The founders never imagined this situation.
Sun Dec 1, 2024, 09:15 AM
Dec 1

They never imagined the electorate would be stupid enough to elect a criminal.

Dem4life1234

(2,040 posts)
9. I admit I'm a bit ignorant of the law
Sun Dec 1, 2024, 10:05 AM
Dec 1

But when Nixon was caught up with his shenanigans and was forced to step down, that was when they should have enacted some form of legislation banning people who got caught up in questionable activities. Something! This is just not right.

Americans who support him should be ashamed of themselves and cannot call themselves moral people.

COL Mustard

(7,037 posts)
11. Unfortunately Article II of the Constitution establishes who can be President.
Sun Dec 1, 2024, 10:10 AM
Dec 1

The only qualifications are:
Natural born US citizen
Over 35 years old
Resident in the US for 14 years.

That's it. Nothing about character, loyalty to the US, criminal convictions, or anything else. The Founders expected the electorate to choose someone of good character, which to them meant no criminals or grifters. I expect they are rolling over in their graves at what we've done.

melm00se

(5,075 posts)
35. The reality
Sun Dec 1, 2024, 04:07 PM
Dec 1

was that our Founding Fathers never considered that Americans would be so stupid to have someone like Trump elected president so they didn't really place limits on who could be president. They figured that the Electoral College, which is made up who are not "Senator(s) or Representative(s), or Person(s) holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States", would intervene if the state's did something really stupid. Unfortunately, being an elector is now just as political as any traditional role that is filled via a partisan election.

They thought that including the impeachment process as a last ditch effort to prevent a "crisis of a national revolution" was sufficient.

I doesn't appear that they consulted with the man who would be the 1st president because if they had he would have said what was in his farewell address:

However [political parties] may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.


His warning was and has been ignored for more than 200 years and we are reaping what we have sown.

(Most people's understanding of Washington begins and ends with "he was a general in War for Independence and the 1st president". He was an incredibly wise and perceptive individual, far more than we expose in traditional education).

DENVERPOPS

(10,330 posts)
22. Turns out, Nixon actually had it right !!!!!!!!!!!
Sun Dec 1, 2024, 12:48 PM
Dec 1

"If the President does it, it is not a crime"...............

RhapsodyFav

(12 posts)
37. The Democratic party has always let them get away with it...
Sun Dec 1, 2024, 04:27 PM
Dec 1

when the previous Republican administrations commit crimes the next Democratic administration "looks forward" instead of holding them accountable and they get worse and worse. Paris Peace accords, Iran-Contra, Middle East lies for war and torture etc. and then all the crime and treason in the Trump administration.

Dem4life1234

(2,040 posts)
39. This!
Sun Dec 1, 2024, 05:40 PM
Dec 1

I am so sick of the coddling! It only makes them worse and they push to see how far they can go.

C0RI0LANUS

(2,310 posts)
3. Trump is considered "criminally inadmissible" to Canada, but he could apply for a "parole" of that status.
Sat Nov 30, 2024, 09:10 PM
Nov 30

"Under Canada’s immigration law, if you have committed or been convicted of a crime, you may not be allowed into Canada. In other words, you may be “criminally inadmissible.”"

This includes both minor and serious crimes, such as:

Theft, assault, manslaughter, dangerous driving, driving while under the influence of drugs or alcohol, and possession of or trafficking in drugs or controlled substances.

Source:

https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/services/immigrate-canada/inadmissibility/overcome-criminal-convictions.html

orleans

(35,410 posts)
40. i googled and this was the a.i. response:
Sun Dec 1, 2024, 05:41 PM
Dec 1

No, Canada generally does not allow convicted felons to visit:
Immigration law: Individuals convicted of indictable offenses are considered "inadmissible" under Canadian immigration law.
Border security: Border officers can deny entry to anyone with a criminal record, even if they have a valid passport.
However, there are some ways to overcome criminal inadmissibility, including:
Temporary Resident Permit (TRP): A TRP allows a visitor with a criminal record to enter Canada for a limited time. However, the odds of getting a TRP are lower for people convicted of serious offenses, especially if they are still serving a sentence.
Criminal rehabilitation: You can apply for individual rehabilitation and get approved.
Pardon or record suspension: You can become admissible again if you receive a pardon or record suspension.
To apply for a TRP, you'll need to:
Complete an online application form
Submit required documents, including a valid passport, proof of funds, and a criminal record check
Explain the reason for your criminal inadmissibility and why your entry into Canada may be justified
You can submit your TRP application at a Canadian consulate or any port of entry.

C0RI0LANUS

(2,310 posts)
42. Thank you for the clarification, orleans. The TRP sounds like the "parole" term I used.
Sun Dec 1, 2024, 07:32 PM
Dec 1

A friend of mine is not allowed into Canada because of a post-juvenile conviction. He went on to become a highly successful attorney having convinced the ABA to overlook the conviction (he's been on TV at least twice).

At a Canadian POE, like you wrote, he was stunned to be denied entry over that decades old non-violent conviction and given the official monologue of why he was inadmissible.

Then the CBSA officer gave him the unofficial line: "Look man, just fill out some forms and you'll be allowed in." The border guard must have been referring to the TRP you noted.

Deuxcents

(20,375 posts)
5. It is true. I Googled it and posted a couple of times. Canada isn't the only country, either
Sat Nov 30, 2024, 09:26 PM
Nov 30

LisaM

(28,825 posts)
27. I mostly remember that they wouldn't let you in Canada if you had one.
Sun Dec 1, 2024, 01:38 PM
Dec 1

I live in a border state, so it's the kind of thing that makes the news in these parts. I don't know if it's a felony but it's grounds to deny admittance to Canada!

Polybius

(18,680 posts)
29. As much as I can't stand drinking and driving, a forever ban seems a bit extreme
Sun Dec 1, 2024, 01:41 PM
Dec 1

Bush got his DUI in like 1979. A Canadian ban for a few years seems reasonable, but for life seems excessive.

Hotler

(12,453 posts)
8. The orange one brought the ring to Biden to kiss. That's called professional courtesy.
Sun Dec 1, 2024, 09:24 AM
Dec 1

Waiting 23-months to start the coup investigation. That's also called professional courtesy.

ancianita

(39,041 posts)
10. ...
Sun Dec 1, 2024, 10:06 AM
Dec 1

For a year I've told DU detractors this, and I'll say it here again: It wasn't waiting.

What you call "waiting" is easy criticism when you during all that time you couldn't possibly perceive what had been happening. Until it was reported by Garland and the DOJ much later.

Which makes any claims of fact about Garland way off, thus your knowledge of the Garland DOJ even more way off.

Before ANY DOJ indictment can be made, a thorough investigation and collection of evidence must take place -- none of which DU'ers saw while it was happening.

Because the FBI is DOJ, Garland's FBI began arrests ON Jan 6 2021 -- two months before his confirmation -- and Garland DOJ convictions continued until the week after the 2024 election.

During the months of FBI arrest actions, Garland was prosecuting new AND outstanding cases,
all while rebuilding the DOJ personnel of his assistant AG’s, deputies, and 8 Division heads.

But before and during that work...

Garland himself wasn't confirmed with Republican votes until TWO months after Biden's 2021 inauguration;
Republicans STILL made Garland wait months for his division heads' confirmations;
Republicans did not confirm Kenneth Polite to head the DOJ's Criminal Division until July 2021 -- SIX MONTHS after Biden's inauguration;
Because they knew the Criminal Division would handle both federal cases under Garland.

Here's the Garland DOJ evidence gathering timeline -- BEFORE Jack Smith made any indictments.

By January 6 2022 (10 months after his confirmation): Garland states:
“So far, we have

-- issued over 5,000 subpoenas and search warrants,
-- seized approximately 2,000 devices,
-- pored through over 20,000 hours of video footage, and
-- searched through an estimated 15 terabytes of data...
-- received over 300,000 tips from ordinary citizens, who have been our indispensable partners in this effort.”

Garland actions above contributed to Special Counsel investigations.
In other words, Garland handed off all the documents case evidence to Jack Smith.


Jan 2022
— 15 boxes found in the storage area
— the FBI found more than 11,000 government records at Maralago — of those
— 184 unique documents bearing classification markings, of those:
— 67 docs marked Confidential
— 92 docs marked Secret
— 25 docs marked Top Secret
markings reflected that docs were subject to sensitive compartments and dissemination controls
used to restrict access to material in the interest of national security, including
HCS(Humint Control system),
FISA(Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act),
ORCON (originator controlled),
NORORN (could be NOFORN, no foreign national), AND
SI(Special Intelligence)

May 2022
— The first 100 documents marked as classified totaled over 700 pages [National Archives letter to Trump attorney, May 10, 2022]
May 11 2022: Garland convenes four DOJ Grand juries, one for Jan 6 convened until March 2024 -- 6 months before Jack Smith walked in the door
— Grand Jury subpoenas Trump for documents

June 3 2022
— Trump lawyer hands over 40 boxes from Maralago storage room
— 38 docs marked Classified


June 3 2022:
Garland's DOJ Grand jury subpoenas Trump for remaining docs in Maralago;
lawyers for Trump "certify" that there were no more;
Trump stole 11,000 government docs, 300 classified docs — the Garland DOJ's FBI found more than Trump's lawyers certified as recovered.

July 22 2022: G
arland's Grand jury testimony by Marc Short, Mike Pence’s Chief of Staff, & Short's counsel Greg Jacob

August 8 2022
— FBI warrant search of Maralago
— 103 marked Classified
— 18 marked Top Secret

The law violated: —- 18 U.S.C. 793— Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information.
Penalty: Fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.
More on the indictability of these stolen defense-classified documents:
https://www.justsecurity.org/83034/tracker-evidence-of-trumps-knowledge-and-involvement-in-retaining-mar-a-lago-documents/

Sept 2 2022:
Garland's Grand jury subpoenaed testimony by Pat Cipollone,
a) one of the participants in WH meeting Dec 18 2020, that included Giuliani, Powell, Flynn, Patrick Byrne of Overstock,
b) Cipollone sat in on Jan 3 2021 DOJ official meeting with Trump, and
c) Cipollone was in direct contact with trump on Jan 6 during capitol insurrection, and did nothing when Meadows told him Trump didn’t want to interfere with rioters calling for hanging Mike Pence)
AND with Patrick Philbin

Sept 15 2022:
Garland's Grand Jury subpoenas Mark Meadows for testimony and documents
the month of Sept 2022: Garland's DOJ issued over 40 subpoenas to people close to Trump, some of whom are
— Bill Stepien, DT’s campaign mgr; part of team to prevent certification
— Sean Dollman, DT’s campaign CFO
— Ben Williamson, Deputy of Mark Meadows,
— Boris Epshteyn, Trump's lawyer -- phone demanded; part of team to prevent certification
— Mike Lindell -- phone seized
— William Russell, WH special asst to Trump, THEN special aide to Trump in Mar-a-lago

Oct 6 2022: Garland's Grand jury calls back Greg Jacob
Oct 13 2022: Garland's Grand Jury calls back Marc Short, Pence's chief of staff

Nov 4 2022:
classified docs found in Biden’s
-- Wilmington home (garage, library), (no docs in Rehoboth beach home) and
-- Penn Biden Center in DC (Richard Sauber is spec counsel to Pres Biden)
Nov 14 2022: Garland asks John Lausch (Trump appointed US Atty, Chicago) to review found Biden documents

Nov 18 2022 Garland appoints Jack Smith (3 days after Trump announces his candidacy for 2024), who inherits the records of the Garland DOJ's work.

By that very day, Nov 18 2022, Garland's DOJ had convicted more than 323 Jan 6 insurrectionists.

All of the above documents case evidence AND DC grand jury evidence gathered is what AG Merrick Garland and his DOJ did before Jack Smith.

Garland himself could not possibly know how long it would take SC Jack Smith's team to file indictments.

But the first documents case indictment was filed June 8 2023, based mostly on work previously done by Garland's Criminal Division/FBI investigators and grand juries
.

For DU'ers triggered by the mention of Garland, these will forever remain the facts of Garland's Jan 6 investigations and evidence collections during his first 20 months in office.

Along with the willfully ignored fact of Garland's wisdom in choosing Jack Smith from the Hague as Special Counsel

EarnestPutz

(2,716 posts)
14. I'll add my thanks to the above. The vilification of Garland has always struck me as loonacy.
Sun Dec 1, 2024, 10:57 AM
Dec 1

msfiddlestix

(7,903 posts)
20. Not I. Just checking my gut impression. I had got a "hit" you might be connected.
Sun Dec 1, 2024, 12:45 PM
Dec 1

that's why the question mark.

ancianita

(39,041 posts)
21. I see. Well, I do have Empty Wheel bookmarked, for sure.
Sun Dec 1, 2024, 12:47 PM
Dec 1

I like their site, but 100% of this info comes from other sources.

msfiddlestix

(7,903 posts)
19. Well that leaves DOJ and AG off the hook, then. So all we have to do is blame our outdated Constitution
Sun Dec 1, 2024, 12:40 PM
Dec 1

And all the law makers since the last century for not fixing the qualification requirements for POTUS.
among other remarkably glaring moribund quirks founders had no possible way to completely foresee the myriad of ways a criminal tyrant and traitor could take power 200+ years in the future.
Of course they could easily imagine it to a degree, and let's not forget how the Constittuion was close to never being ratified , because of obstructionists who were actually loyalists to the crown . some who were southern slave an d plantation owners, others who were wealthy merchants. etc.

Shoulda, woulda, coulda, A big huge mistake, a series of colossal misdeeds and or missed opportunities to take legislative actions with the Constitution especially wrt to Nixon.

Oh hell, we couldn't even manage to ratify the ERA for effs sakes.
All this (and so much more) tells me is we have been suffering a most monumental state of delusion for years, decades, more than a century. There is no fixing anything now. We aren't losing a democracy, we;re being reminded that we never had one in the first place.
The fascists right wingers have been saying forever we live in a Republic not a democracy.
Well, the former is just as meaningless as the latter, now.



ancianita

(39,041 posts)
23. The Garland DOJ did its job, so why should it even be on the hook? There's WAY more evidence that it shouldn't be at all
Sun Dec 1, 2024, 01:12 PM
Dec 1

The Garland DOJ never could speed up the grand jury work. Garland DOJ could never speed up the courts' schedules or delays on pre-trial rulings. And then the Jack Smith team, no matter how constantly he invoked the the "speedy trial" law, it was always ignored. Why? Because there were the endless due process motions filed beyond "sufficient" level that can delay court cases before trials.

And then major defense motions got appealed, and went up the appeal ladder all the way to the Maga SCOTUS, that delayed even hearing every single appeal for months from the DOJ. Months. Those delays added up, and are in no way the Garland DOJ's fault.

Lisa Rubin on MSNBC flatly stated that even were there trials and convictions this year, appeals would have been held up by Maga SCOTUS until after the election. So no matter how fast you think Garland could have investigated, no matter how many months sooner Smith filed his indictment, all the above would have still played out, and we'd still be without convictions this year.

The Garland DOJ -- biggest law firm in human history -- has done a massive and great job enforcing both domestic and international justice.



Polybius

(18,680 posts)
25. "Nov 18 2022 Garland appoints Jack Smith"
Sun Dec 1, 2024, 01:34 PM
Dec 1

Couldn't that have been done earlier? Even a few months earlier may have helped (or not, we'll never know).

BDavinciNY

(104 posts)
34. Thanks for that timeline
Sun Dec 1, 2024, 03:53 PM
Dec 1

Let's not forget that Mitch McConnell helped out Trump in a huge way by not, voting to convict him in both his impeachment trials. Had the Republicans voted to convict him, he would have been politically disqualified from running for President. And thanks for reminding me that Garland shouldn't receive as much criticism as he's getting because the time of getting the investigation. The then the grand jury, it takes its time. Also, let's not forget Trump delayed it as long as possible, so the fix was already in when McConnell and the Republicans. Decided to let him off the hook for January 6th.

uponit7771

(92,119 posts)
43. +1, Garland ***COULD HAVE*** assigned an SC first day in office knowing J6 could've been a big deal that involved MAGA
Sun Dec 1, 2024, 07:39 PM
Dec 1

...reps, Garland decided not to.

America needed and asshole to go after MAGA J6 insurrectionist but we got the administrator and he failed minimum the time and tenor of the situation.

God help us

C Moon

(12,626 posts)
26. It's funny, but it's just trump being himself and enjoying making people squirm and sit at his feet.
Sun Dec 1, 2024, 01:37 PM
Dec 1

elleng

(137,251 posts)
28. No joke!
Sun Dec 1, 2024, 01:38 PM
Dec 1

Hoping Trudeau and Pres. Sheinbaum straighten tmp out (tho I have little hope for him.)

LiberalArkie

(16,745 posts)
31. Well, probably since the five eyes monitor international phone calls, Trudeau did not want anyone else to know what he
Sun Dec 1, 2024, 02:05 PM
Dec 1

was saying to Trump.

Response to Swede (Original post)

onenote

(44,862 posts)
38. Bullshit. Under Canadian law, if the government opts to allow him to enter the country, he can enter the country
Sun Dec 1, 2024, 05:19 PM
Dec 1

And there is zero chance that Trudeau's government would prevent Trump from visiting if that's what he wanted.

Trump didn't go to Canada and had Trudeau meet him in Florida not because Trump couldn't have travelled to Canada, but because he didn't want to -- he wanted Trudeau to come to him.

It's as simple as that.

orleans

(35,410 posts)
41. stop it! you're spoiling the magic of the moment
Sun Dec 1, 2024, 05:49 PM
Dec 1

i would much prefer to think the visit in florida is b/c trump can't gain access to canada because he is a CRIMINAL

(but, in all practicality, i agree w/what you wrote.) (i'd just prefer to be amused with how it appears on the surface)



Latest Discussions»General Discussion»If your wondering why Tru...