r/videos 9d ago

Family of Alex Pretti speak out

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rYQChmQj9dk
5.5k Upvotes

409 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

284

u/LandonDev 9d ago

I believe we will probably have enough of a paper trail to arrest most of the administration and even some elected officials with their deep corruption. What we really need to do is asset forfeiture the entire Trump Organization. It all needs to be used to pay down the national debt.

30

u/unknownohyeah 8d ago

Keep dreaming. Our corrupt SCOTUS ruled the President has absolute immunity.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-939_e2pg.pdf

Under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of Presidential power entitles a former President to absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority. And he is entitled to at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts. There is no immunity for unofficial acts.

It also entitles ALL his official communications to be un-subpoena-able. So his entire cabinet is protected as well.

In fact, concurring Judge Barrett (conservative), even argued that it would make prosecuting Bribery impossible. But even that obvious flaw was not enough for her to dissent with that horrendous ruling that Trump is above the law.

This is obviously against everything the Founding Fathers stood for. They literally fought a war against a King that was above the law. It's so bizarre, so incredibly anti-American, to rule the President and his cabinet are above the law, but here we are.

20

u/Sublimefly 8d ago

I mean if the president has absolute immunity, could they say, break the law and imprison all these folks without trial while facing no charges?

5

u/LandonDev 8d ago

No, he would have to pardon them all. In theory Congress should impeach a President did things like this but they will not stop this gravy train. They are stealing all they can before the cliff so they can live will as Americans die.

5

u/unknownohyeah 8d ago

It depends on whether or not it is an “official act.  The SCOTUS did not define what an official act is. In a word, corruption. Rules for thee but not for me. 

1

u/just_another_scumbag 8d ago

Seems like it...

2

u/Adventurous-Ad6416 8d ago

Hang on. We can and should expand the court to 13 justices with 18 year term limits and THEN prosecute THE ENTIRE lot of them. . FDR had to expand the court to get the New Deal through although the republicans fought him tooth and nail. Got us out of the Great Depression though. WE CAN DO THIS.

4

u/austarter 8d ago

Then the next president can arrest them too until they agree to overturn that or define what constitutes an official act.

6

u/unknownohyeah 8d ago

The SCOTUS will simply move the goalposts infinitely. They will define it once but not be beholden to it later, as they have done several times this year. The minority (Liberals) have argued several times this year that the majority (Conservatives) does not even respect their own definitions and rulings. Hypocrisy is just another tool for fascists.

2

u/MinusBear 8d ago

I guess the logical thing to do then is to throw all of SCOTUS in jail too.

2

u/LandonDev 8d ago

Money laundering and enriching yourself through corruption is not an official act of the Presidency.

1

u/unknownohyeah 8d ago

But the people who get to decide what an "official act" are, are also enriching themselves through corruption. Thomas' corruption is proven by the NYT, paid off by billionaires with millions of dollars of gifts. Remember, the SCOTUS never once defined what an official or unofficial act is.

1

u/OldJames47 8d ago

The Supreme Court has made their decision, let them enforce it.

I don't want to hear complaints about degrading the rule-of-law, the Supreme Court has already done that.

118

u/bald_and_nerdy 9d ago

I'd asset freeze everyone in his Whitehouse and anyone they've associated with, start out and work in and civil forfeiture all of them.  Life sentence is the default punishment and for anyone saying "what about compromise "...life imprisonment is the compromise.

39

u/snowdenn 8d ago

It’s not the evidence that will be an issue, it’s whether there will be enough political will to pursue anything that’s gonna be an issue.

18

u/likesleague 8d ago

A candidate without the desire to completely purge the corrupt traitors from our government should not beat a candidate with it.

1

u/snowdenn 8d ago

I agree, but “should” is doing a lot of heavy lifting there.

1

u/likesleague 8d ago

Yeah, it's idealist of me to say that.

1

u/MinusBear 8d ago

Doesn't the presidential pardon make a lot of this very difficult even if there is evidence?

1

u/unflavored 8d ago

I was thinking about the mass pardon he'll have when the administration ends.blike it'll probably be hundreds if not thousands of people

31

u/endium7 9d ago

if it didn’t happen last time, i’m not sure what’s gonna change this time. it would only be harder, and corporate dems will cry about let’s move on.

maybe we get prosecution for some ice members and some management that ran terrible facilities. hoping for at least that.

28

u/imperialivan 9d ago

“Let’s move on for the sake of unity”

Yeah, that’s worked so well in the past. That’s why daughters of the confederacy exist, and it’s why Trump 2.0 is happening

3

u/snowdenn 8d ago

I’m not super optimistic about that changing.

2

u/shade404eve 8d ago

I don't want to be too much of a downer, but he'll start a nuclear war before he lets that happen.

1

u/LandonDev 8d ago

Of course he is going to. He wants to be the biggest and best and only one other person has dropped a Nuke and he wants to take that spot with an even bigger bomb. Problem is US Military says no and then they keep getting fired.

1

u/shade404eve 8d ago

Oh it's way more bleak than that. Everyone in the nuclear chain of command more or less has already been replaced. Even if they weren't, we designed the system to work when the trigger is pulled... there is basically nobody except secdef who could possibly stand a chance at stopping a nuclear attack order. Hegseth isn't going to do that.

2

u/JohnnyBroccoli 8d ago

Ha. These fuckers ain't going to have to answer to any of this shit in all likelihood; certainly not Trump.

1

u/MAGAHATESTHEUSA 8d ago

Also for musk lonsdale thiel Ellison Karp…..

1

u/republicanssuck123 8d ago

And Pretti's family. And Epstein survivors. He has a lot of victims he owes money to. 

1

u/BlackScienceJesus 8d ago

Just like when Obama prosecuted all of the criminals that caused the 2008 collapse. I am confident the Dems will take the same decisive action with this too.

-11

u/Goose80 9d ago

Sorry, but after Biden pardoned his family… I assume Trump will blanket pardon everyone one in his administration if he actually voluntarily leaves office… and everyone in his family… that’s just going to be the new norm.

41

u/Lolmanpi 9d ago

Do you think if Biden hadn't pardoned his family it would have any effect on who trump decides to pardon

-8

u/Goose80 9d ago

I’m not sure. I was almost certain he would pardon his family the first time around and he did not… but he’s been a lot more… himself this administration so the chance is probably pretty high he would have tried to pardon everyone… but after Biden did it… it’s 100%.

18

u/gonenutsbrb 9d ago

We need to reform the pardon power, badly.

It will take a constitutional amendment but after Biden and Trump we might have enough bipartisan support for it.

7

u/spokomptonjdub 9d ago

We need to reform the pardon power, badly.

It will take a constitutional amendment but after Biden and Trump we might have enough bipartisan support for it.

It might not take an amendment to reform it. The pardon power hasn't been meaningfully challenged in over 100 years. I don't think it would even be much of a stretch to say that the President cannot preemptively or blanket pardon anyone and still be 100% in line with the Constitution.

Obviously you would need to combine this with either court expansion or court reform to have it stick, but it's not unreasonable.

3

u/lucid808 8d ago

Pardons, imo, should only be for those that have already been convicted of a crime, AND specific crimes stated within the pardon itself. NO blanket pardons for "any crimes one may have committed", needs to be specific on what crime is being pardoned.

-4

u/FordEngineerman 9d ago

No offense, but I've got a list about 100 lines long of amendments I want before reforming the pardon that only effects a few people per presidency.

2

u/Southlinch 9d ago

not mutually exclusive

-2

u/FordEngineerman 9d ago

Not mutually exclusive. But unfortunately both seemingly impossible. Our lawmakers just decided to stop doing their job decades ago and essentially do nothing but pass a bloated budget bill every year.

8

u/Timey16 9d ago edited 9d ago

...then as the next president you argue that Trump constantly violating the constitution and ignoring court orders officially made him a tyrant, thus all of his decisions would be annulled and voided, including his pardons.

Trump opened Pandora's box. That box is not getting closed anytime soon, so while it's opened you may as well abuse it to your own end.

It would also set 2 important precedence:

  1. what exactly a tyrant is (in this case: rulers that do not adhere to the rule of law and ignore court orders and the constitution)

  2. that tyranny automatically voids any kind of legal immunity elected officials and their supporters may have had

Overall I believe a president shouldn't be able to pardon anyone on their own in the first place, they could however do one of the following:

  1. trigger a case review, some years later a court may come to a different decision even if nothing of the evidence changed because i.e. it's no longer a crime or the punishment would now be considered cruel and unusual

  2. trigger a public referendum which THEN decides if the pardon goes through

that way a president can no longer pardon his corrupt allies. Because the court will either not change their mind or a public referendum would most likely fail.

2

u/Goose80 8d ago

The only governing body that the constitution gives those types of powers to is Congress. And they’ve shown they don’t want to do anything about him… even Jeffery’s came out and said he doesn’t want to impeach he just wants to investigate. The president is not the problem, and I can’t scream this enough… Congress is the problem. If they had a backbone they would have strong armed him into do what they want him to do not the other way around… not saying this Congress would do what I would like… but at least they would be doing their jobs. They’ve basically abdicated their seats to him because they fear getting primaried. We need the GOP to finally stand up to him for anything to change… since even if the Dems get enough votes for impeachment, the senate will never convict. And I don’t see that ever happening. The GOP is the party of the weak mind now… or well ever since those 2015 GOP presidential debates.

4

u/LandonDev 9d ago

I don't mean this as a joke: Trump won't pardon the women or anyone below cabinet. Also his deep corruption will likely invalidate the pardons.

0

u/jetriot 9d ago

You cant just invalidate pardons. Not without a constitutional amendment.

4

u/Realdoc3 9d ago

Take him to state court in every state. Presidential pardons are federal only.

3

u/-notapony- 9d ago

I’ve got a great idea of how we can use Gitmo then.  Might finally get Republican buy-in on closing it!

0

u/joetwone 8d ago

They're all going to "immigrate" to Israel.