Cody 
Robert ReichQuestion for those who say prosecuting a former president sets a dangerous precedent: Isn’t it more dangerous to set a precedent that a former president will never face accountability for breaking the law and inciting an insurrection?
OddPlz@rbreich There is already a dangerous president, even if he is a former one.
Hareeba@rbreich
100% agree
100% agree
NanaKim@rbreich Yes. Absolutely more dangerous.
Jamie Morgan
Escarpment@rbreich This is the exact tension. I think it's a good thing to acknowledge as a risk and then move on with the prosecution.
Also, the precedent would be prosecuting a former president *for alleged criminal behavior* where there is *evidence*. And the statutes violated by the president were written years before the president took office, so the president had ample opportunity to study them and learn how not to violate them.
draketoots@escarpment @rbreich and as it appears he acted against the advice of the Justice department and his own counsel.
bls@rbreich If he's not held accountable the next guy (or maybe the same guy again) will be emboldened to push the line even farther. Best to confront it now and deal with the maga fallout than letting it incubate further and fester.
serial26@rbreich this 100%
Cornelia@rbreich Reality Winner spent 5 years in prison for attempting to warn America about Russian interference in our election. She paid the price for what she did. We can not and should not protect Trump because he was a President. He must face the music.
Tanquist@rbreich I think this "dangerous precedent" claim is just hand wringing by Trump supporters.
Martian Judge@rbreich I agree. It’s not in our country’s best interest to appease a self interested faction which decidedly willfully is against our Nation of laws. Otherwise, truth and Justice would be meaningless
QuinnPatty52@rbreich He's already set a dangerous and destructive precedent, the first person to occupy the presidency and commit the crime and corruption he has. He must face accountability.
Jim Sheerin@rbreich there’s no choice but to prosecute Trump. On at least 3 fronts…
Timothy Mercy@rbreich Not prosecuting Trump for an attempted Coup sets a dangerous precedent. He has proven in the past that he becomes emboldened if not held to account. Garland and Smith must indict and prosecute Trump, they Jane no other choice. They can take the OLC memo and put it in the toilet, it is not law or a constitutional provision
Enrico Fermi@rbreich there you go again trying to use logic and facts
Moondoggie@rbreich Had Nixon been prosecuted, we may have had more honest government these past 50 years and maybe would not have had to endure the presidency of a crook who makes Nixon look like a choir boy. Ford meant well, but the pardon was a big mistake. Now Trump must be held accountable. If not, future presidents will be able to get away with anything.
Threadbane@rbreich
It's almost gone unnoticed, but for all intents and purposes the emoluments clause seems to have become obsolete. How did the hundreds of millions of dollars that Trump raked in as President not be in violation of the emoluments clause? I remember when somebody gave the Bill Clinton a $30000 (?) couch for the White House and the Republicans wanted him marched out in leg irons.
It's almost gone unnoticed, but for all intents and purposes the emoluments clause seems to have become obsolete. How did the hundreds of millions of dollars that Trump raked in as President not be in violation of the emoluments clause? I remember when somebody gave the Bill Clinton a $30000 (?) couch for the White House and the Republicans wanted him marched out in leg irons.
Jon@rbreich LOCK HIM UP!
Max Power@rbreich Preach!
Adam Cook@rbreich This could be a victory for the U.S. To make a clear stand that the rule of law and accountability means so much to us, that power and wealth cannot save someone from justice. It would be a powerful statement to the world.
MilkieM@rbreich 1 million percent.
Melodee@rbreich they already did that when Ford pardoned Nixon
@rbreich if this happens then it basically says Former presidents are above the law and in future they might include the Supreme court judges and even the top 1 percent. Trump is guilty from get go. He should be punished for his crime. If he's not then it's going to become even more banana republic then what's already we see. And there'll be no accountability when he decides to run again for 2024. If he wins he might change the clause of 2 term president
RNRatched@rbreich Exactly! It’s a much more dangerous precedent to let it go unpunished.
Grumble@rbreich
You'd think Trump would demand his day in court to conclusively get a jury to declare him innocent and the charges all bullshit.
Instead, Trump seems to delay and distract to prevent a day in court. And he pays a lot of money to his lawyers for that delay.
Weird strategy for an innocent man, wrongly accused.
@grumble209 @rbreich
He doesn't pay lawyers jack. That is why so few, save the ethically bankrupt, will work for him.
He doesn't pay lawyers jack. That is why so few, save the ethically bankrupt, will work for him.
Trump's newest lawyers understand that TFG doesn't pay his debts, so now they demand cash up front.
https://news.yahoo.com/trump-paying-3-million-lawyer-235237164.html
Julio 🏳️🌈 🇨🇺 🇪🇸 🇺🇸@rbreich But of course. We all know it.
Roxie Moxie@rbreich absolutely!
Robert Denby@rbreich Robert, I'd say we already have our answer. Ford pardoned Nixon claiming we needed that to heal. Well, within a decade, Reagan declared war on gubmint, and ushered in the never ending radicalization of the GQP against anyone not themselves...and sold missiles to Iran to fund death squads in south america. We HAVE our answer. Nixon being pardoned didn't heal us, it empowered more GQP extremism.
Motherpupper@rbreich right????
heynav135@rbreich
We missed an opportunity to impose consequences for sedition and insurrection after the Civil War. We missed another opportunity in the 1940s. We must impose consequences this time, or the madness will continue to rear its ugly, poisonous head every 80 years in the future
We missed an opportunity to impose consequences for sedition and insurrection after the Civil War. We missed another opportunity in the 1940s. We must impose consequences this time, or the madness will continue to rear its ugly, poisonous head every 80 years in the future
Mark R. Stoneman@rbreich Ford's pardon of Nixon offers a stark answer. Trump heard that message.
Agora@rbreich Even Pakistan banned their former PM from running again for 5 years. For corruption charges!!
Luis Miguel@rbreich absolutely
zemsgram@rbreich trump himself set the “dangerous precedents” and he needs to pay the consequences.
Cathy@rbreich Silliness. Do the crime; do the time. No matter WHO you are. Anything else is just a final nail in the coffin for the U. S. Welcome to post-Apocalyptic America. Technofeudal capital of the world.
Teresa@rbreich Nixon should have been prosecuted, but Ford was a wuss. Trump committed sedition which is FAR worse.
Steffie B, BSN, RN
Hoigwai@rbreich I feel if anything, it is far more important to hold any member of the government to the highest standards of the law.
Marty Crabneck 🌍
@rbreich That would be nothing new. In fact, it looks like a God-given law never to prosecute US Presidents. For example, war criminals Reagan, Bush 1 and 2 were never held accountable for their appalling crimes.
Zhi Zhu 🕸️“The absence of accountability is not neutrality, but affirmance: an invitation to wrongdoers to escalate wrongdoing and for others to follow suit.”
~@protctdemocracy
Link: https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/21174158/towards-non-recurrence-2022.pdf
The DOJ needs to hold ALL those involved in the #TrumpCoupAttempt accountable.
Sugarbearlover@rbreich , these are people who appear to be absolutely okay with our government being overthrown. We used to think ‘coups’ only happened in third world countries…
Ronnie Colvin@rbreich I’m curious as to what constitutes “danger” in prosecuting a former president, or anyone, if they broke the law. Why should a former president be special?
J.D. Haight@rbreich , Nixon's pardon certainly didn't keep Trump from breaking the law. And just weeks ago, were'nt mediafolk advising us against repeating that mistake.
Hell, you have Hugh Hewitt advising us to exercise "The Agnew Option." Frankly if a member of GOPsycho is advising us to do something, the smart money is on doing the opposite.
authoredbyjames 🌲🏔🌊@rbreich Exactly, ignoring it only makes future leaders more brazen in their actions
loataoN@rbreich Damn right. More important to hold those with power accountable.
@rbreich it is definitely worse to NOT prosecute a criminal ex-president.
Susanne Kaufmann@rbreich no one is above the law. Must prosecute
@rbreich
If you don't prosecute, you're saying some people are above the law.
If you don't prosecute, you're saying some people are above the law.
Fessie SchussThe better statement is that electing a corrupt moron is a dangerous precedent.
Raksiam 🏳️🌈🇲🇲🇹🇼🇹🇭⚽@rbreich so many other countries manage to do it, why can't we?
LindaNYC2VT Ⓥ 🌊🐖🐄🐓🦃🐬🐝🦋🦇
Francisca Sinn
marktaylor
rumisufi@rbreich Those who say prosecuting a former president sets a dangerous precedent are themselves a bunch of criminals and lowlifes.
Gurtbeef Robe@rbreich how on earth does it set any dangerous precedent to prosecute a criminal? I know our maga crowd won’t ever be mistaken for geniuses but this is possibly the dumbest excuse I’ve ever heard to allow criminals in the White House.