Had to go ten pages back to find this thread, but it's relevant again. I mean, it's always relevant that Trump has been credibly accused of so many sexual assaults, and it's a shame that his gish gallop of scandals keep most of this off the front pages, but still...
"The dress has been tested. We have the results. My attorney @kaplanrobbie has served notice to @realDonaldTrump 's attorney to submit a sample of Trump's DNA."
- E. Jean Carroll was the latest in a long string of women to credibly accuse the President of sexual assault (in this case, rape).
Yeah, can't see how having the President submit to a DNA test for comparison to a stain on a dress has ever gone badly for the President.
Will be interesting to see how the President's lackeys and bootlicks contort themselves into saying this time is different.
I mean in a rational world him not submitting to a dna check would be a red flag, but the man is all red flags, everything about him is a red flag and it does nothing.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Trump is a rapist. The accusation doesn't surprise me at all. We knew he was a sexual predator when he was running talent shows.
I am ashamed of this president. That our system of government failed to stop him is inexcusable.
Edit:
Can't someone just swab any doorknob he uses or any glass he drinks from?
Go swab one of his stupid KFC buckets.
I believe that there has to be a warrant issued in order to be allowed to obtain his DNA without consent unless he already has his DNA in a database from committing a previous crime. Yes, a random person could obtain a DNA sample from him, but assuming it was an untainted sample (which would be tough to prove outside an official lab setting), it would not have been obtained legally and thus not be considered eligible as evidence even if it had a 100% match with the other DNA material.
So if Trump had been convicted and DNA tested before, they could pull that prior material again, but wouldn't need to go through this process anyway. Without that, they're stuck waiting for him to either submit willingly or for the legal system to say he has to. I don't think the whole cliche about pulling his DNA from a used drinking cup or whatever applies, because the cup wouldn't be attached to a crime; even that would need a judge to give the go-ahead prior to collecting.
It goes with the whole "innocent until proven guilty" thing. You can collect evidence at the scene of a crime, but you can't go into a person's house and collect evidence simply because they've been accused of a crime; there has to be some other pressing evidence and support from the legal system to take that route. A good idea in principle, but obviously it falls apart when the accused has millions of dollars in lawyers to fend off the issue for infinite time and thus never have to submit no matter how much the average person would be screwed.
Ninja Snarl P on
0
Options
MrMonroepassed outon the floor nowRegistered Userregular
There is a zero % chance trump submits for a dna check
Is it something the courts could compel?
I highly doubt it, again this presidency ignores every possible compelling anything. No way will he ever provide DNA.
I meant, does the law allow it, not whether he'd follow through.
In criminal cases the judge can definitely compel a defendant to submit to a DNA test, it seems slightly less clear for civil cases. (Unless it's a paternity suit, where courts seem perfectly willing to compel testing)
The problem is that the main solution for a recalcitrant defendant is contempt, and there's no way any court in America actually attempts to hold the President in contempt.
Metzger MeisterIt Gets Worsebefore it gets any better.Registered Userregular
No way will you get a court to issue a warrant for the president's DNA. I just can't see that happening. And even if it did, no way would Trump follow the order.
There is a zero % chance trump submits for a dna check
Is it something the courts could compel?
I highly doubt it, again this presidency ignores every possible compelling anything. No way will he ever provide DNA.
I meant, does the law allow it, not whether he'd follow through.
In criminal cases the judge can definitely compel a defendant to submit to a DNA test, it seems slightly less clear for civil cases. (Unless it's a paternity suit, where courts seem perfectly willing to compel testing)
The problem is that the main solution for a recalcitrant defendant is contempt, and there's no way any court in America actually attempts to hold the President in contempt.
I dunno. I'm pretty sure the majority of the country holds him in contempt, including a lot (though less and less as McConnell's 'justice reforms' continue) of judiciaries.
Ohh. You meant the legal, not emotional, definition. Nevermind.
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
I’m surprised his dna isn’t already on file in, like, a dozen different criminal databases
They could do like they did with that one serial killer they caught recently, apparently it’s legal to dig through someone’s trash and get their dna from a used utensil or whatever. Just a much trickier heist in the case of a POTUS... start tailing the rallies and follow the Big Mac wrappers...
They could do like they did with that one serial killer they caught recently, apparently it’s legal to dig through someone’s trash and get their dna from a used utensil or whatever. Just a much trickier heist in the case of a POTUS... start tailing the rallies and follow the Big Mac wrappers...
Just a reminder that the Secret Service actually collects POTUS waste even when on overseas trips due to its potential intelligence value...
*begins to look ill thinking about it*
Black lives matter.
Law and Order ≠ Justice
ACNH Island Isla Cero: DA-3082-2045-4142
Captain of the SES Comptroller of the State
They could do like they did with that one serial killer they caught recently, apparently it’s legal to dig through someone’s trash and get their dna from a used utensil or whatever. Just a much trickier heist in the case of a POTUS... start tailing the rallies and follow the Big Mac wrappers...
Just a reminder that the Secret Service actually collects POTUS waste even when on overseas trips due to its potential intelligence value...
*begins to look ill thinking about it*
Yeah, but meanwhile, they let him take water bottles from random people and drink it:
The president asked for some water, and with no staff bringing any to him, Pelosi handed him a bottle of Aquafina from her purse. “I’ve been into the White House,” Pelosi later said of visits to see previous presidents. “There are always protocols. Here there were no rules, no protocol.” She added, “There’s so much wrong with the whole thing. I’m thinking, Isn’t there someone who’s supposed to guard what he’s eating and drinking?”
It's not incredibly relevant, since they aren't getting his DNA either way. Still wild though.
They could do like they did with that one serial killer they caught recently, apparently it’s legal to dig through someone’s trash and get their dna from a used utensil or whatever. Just a much trickier heist in the case of a POTUS... start tailing the rallies and follow the Big Mac wrappers...
Just a reminder that the Secret Service actually collects POTUS waste even when on overseas trips due to its potential intelligence value...
*begins to look ill thinking about it*
Yeah, but meanwhile, they let him take water bottles from random people and drink it:
The president asked for some water, and with no staff bringing any to him, Pelosi handed him a bottle of Aquafina from her purse. “I’ve been into the White House,” Pelosi later said of visits to see previous presidents. “There are always protocols. Here there were no rules, no protocol.” She added, “There’s so much wrong with the whole thing. I’m thinking, Isn’t there someone who’s supposed to guard what he’s eating and drinking?”
It's not incredibly relevant, since they aren't getting his DNA either way. Still wild though.
No way will you get a court to issue a warrant for the president's DNA. I just can't see that happening. And even if it did, no way would Trump follow the order.
He'd probably try to claim executive privilege on his sperm.
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
+18
Options
Donovan PuppyfuckerA dagger in the dark isworth a thousand swords in the morningRegistered Userregular
It really doesn't seem like it would be that hard to get this president to get a drink from a water bottle.
It's not the feasibility, it's the legality. Without a court order for a DNA sample or allowing for a DNA sample to be collected, the results would not be admissible in court.
Unless Trump had a random moment of insanity and just forked over a DNA sample willingly, with a clear statement saying "go ahead and test it".
It really doesn't seem like it would be that hard to get this president to get a drink from a water bottle.
It's not the feasibility, it's the legality. Without a court order for a DNA sample or allowing for a DNA sample to be collected, the results would not be admissible in court.
Unless Trump had a random moment of insanity and just forked over a DNA sample willingly, with a clear statement saying "go ahead and test it".
No. If you throw tour dna away willingly then theyre in the clear
0
Options
Ninja Snarl PMy helmet is my burden.Ninja Snarl: Gone, but not forgotten.Registered Userregular
It really doesn't seem like it would be that hard to get this president to get a drink from a water bottle.
It's not the feasibility, it's the legality. Without a court order for a DNA sample or allowing for a DNA sample to be collected, the results would not be admissible in court.
Unless Trump had a random moment of insanity and just forked over a DNA sample willingly, with a clear statement saying "go ahead and test it".
No. If you throw tour dna away willingly then theyre in the clear
This is only very partially correct. They're free to test the random, anonymous DNA sample they've recovered, yes, but have no way to prove is the Trump's because there is no chain of custody of said sample, there's no database with Trump's DNA that is accessible for this purpose to use for a comparison, the sample has not been collected in a controlled environment, and there's absolutely no way to legally prove it hasn't been either contaminated or belongs to someone else outright without, again, obtaining a consenting sample directly from Trump. It doesn't matter if they collected the sample from Trump's favorite coffee mug that says "If you want a DNA sample from Trump, use this mug", because the DNA could belong to anybody, or more likely several anybodies, on the planet.
The very best you could do is prove that the sample of DNA from the the discarded item matches what is on the dress, which still does nothing whatsoever to actually incriminate Trump. It might, possibly, be enough to convince a judge to issue a warrant to force the issue, if the accused was an average person and this was a criminal case. Since the accused is a) probably the single most corrupt individual to ever hold the office of President and b) extremely wealthy, the odds are extremely low that his lawyers would not be able to easily avoid having their client be forced to submit to testing based on such circumstantial evidence.
The failure here isn't the restrictions on collecting DNA, it's on society at large for letting Trump get away with this shit for decades because he's rich and white. This is not something where anybody should want lax restrictions, unless they also want cops to be able to test the DNA of any random innocent just in case they're linked to a crime (which is absolutely illegal now and is basically what people are describing for this scenario).
If Trump does not offer up a clean, controlled sample in some way or a judge doesn't force the issue (and even then, lawyers will fight it), then there is no way to legally link him to a DNA sample on a dress.
Yeah this is well outside the realm of anything that could be actionable legally. But it does testify to the confidence of the accuser to make the claim. And it might bait trump into saying or doing something stupid and incriminating. More than all the other stupid and incriminating stuff he’s already said that is
Today in Bill Barr's monumental corruption, he's decided DOJ is Trump's personal attorney in the E. Jean Carroll lawsuit, which arises from actions from years before Trump was president.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
Today in Bill Barr's monumental corruption, he's decided DOJ is Trump's personal attorney in the E. Jean Carroll lawsuit, which arises from actions from years before Trump was president.
And here's her lawyer's reply, from Carroll herself:
This is another "run out the clock" play, as they know full well there's no grounds to appeal the court ruling that no, being President doesn't make you immune.
No way will you get a court to issue a warrant for the president's DNA. I just can't see that happening. And even if it did, no way would Trump follow the order.
He'd probably try to claim executive privilege on his sperm.
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
This seems like a great way to skyrocket the case to the front and center of the news cycle and perfectly link it to his corruption. Which is insane, cos while a lot of people don’t give a shit about his sexual assault, polls show if you can link his general assholery and monstrousness to corruption and abusing his office, people actually give a shit
Using the lawyer meant to be in charge of the counties crucial legal cases to protect himself from a civil rape accusation, it’s like the worst move he could have made, from a moral and political perspective, hell maybe even from a legal perspective
Posts
"The dress has been tested. We have the results. My attorney @kaplanrobbie has served notice to @realDonaldTrump 's attorney to submit a sample of Trump's DNA."
- E. Jean Carroll was the latest in a long string of women to credibly accuse the President of sexual assault (in this case, rape).
Yeah, can't see how having the President submit to a DNA test for comparison to a stain on a dress has ever gone badly for the President.
Will be interesting to see how the President's lackeys and bootlicks contort themselves into saying this time is different.
pleasepaypreacher.net
(That is still exactly what they would say if the President ever submitted to a DNA test, which seems improbable)
pleasepaypreacher.net
I am ashamed of this president. That our system of government failed to stop him is inexcusable.
Edit:
Can't someone just swab any doorknob he uses or any glass he drinks from?
Go swab one of his stupid KFC buckets.
Is it something the courts could compel?
3DS: 0473-8507-2652
Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
PSN: AbEntropy
I highly doubt it, again this presidency ignores every possible compelling anything. No way will he ever provide DNA.
pleasepaypreacher.net
I meant, does the law allow it, not whether he'd follow through.
3DS: 0473-8507-2652
Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
PSN: AbEntropy
I believe that there has to be a warrant issued in order to be allowed to obtain his DNA without consent unless he already has his DNA in a database from committing a previous crime. Yes, a random person could obtain a DNA sample from him, but assuming it was an untainted sample (which would be tough to prove outside an official lab setting), it would not have been obtained legally and thus not be considered eligible as evidence even if it had a 100% match with the other DNA material.
So if Trump had been convicted and DNA tested before, they could pull that prior material again, but wouldn't need to go through this process anyway. Without that, they're stuck waiting for him to either submit willingly or for the legal system to say he has to. I don't think the whole cliche about pulling his DNA from a used drinking cup or whatever applies, because the cup wouldn't be attached to a crime; even that would need a judge to give the go-ahead prior to collecting.
It goes with the whole "innocent until proven guilty" thing. You can collect evidence at the scene of a crime, but you can't go into a person's house and collect evidence simply because they've been accused of a crime; there has to be some other pressing evidence and support from the legal system to take that route. A good idea in principle, but obviously it falls apart when the accused has millions of dollars in lawyers to fend off the issue for infinite time and thus never have to submit no matter how much the average person would be screwed.
In criminal cases the judge can definitely compel a defendant to submit to a DNA test, it seems slightly less clear for civil cases. (Unless it's a paternity suit, where courts seem perfectly willing to compel testing)
The problem is that the main solution for a recalcitrant defendant is contempt, and there's no way any court in America actually attempts to hold the President in contempt.
I dunno. I'm pretty sure the majority of the country holds him in contempt, including a lot (though less and less as McConnell's 'justice reforms' continue) of judiciaries.
Ohh. You meant the legal, not emotional, definition. Nevermind.
http://lexiconmegatherium.tumblr.com/
Just a reminder that the Secret Service actually collects POTUS waste even when on overseas trips due to its potential intelligence value...
*begins to look ill thinking about it*
Law and Order ≠ Justice
ACNH Island Isla Cero: DA-3082-2045-4142
Captain of the SES Comptroller of the State
Yeah, but meanwhile, they let him take water bottles from random people and drink it:
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/01/donald-trump-disastrous-encounter-with-the-constitution-very-stable-genius
It's not incredibly relevant, since they aren't getting his DNA either way. Still wild though.
I know, it’s a mean thought, but they will definitely bring that up.
I'd wonder if they could appreciate the crushing irony
Come Overwatch with meeeee
According to her, she couldn't even look at it.
How long before someone on the right claims that she must be making it all up because of what went down with Clinton?
Understandable :sad:
This is actually pretty terrible news
You had an in, Nancy!
He'd probably try to claim executive privilege on his sperm.
Why do you think Ghislaine Maxwell is still free?
Because she's got a folder full of old used condoms awaiting medical testing...
You're surprised? If something is a petty abuse of power, Trump has probably already done it at some point.
It's not the feasibility, it's the legality. Without a court order for a DNA sample or allowing for a DNA sample to be collected, the results would not be admissible in court.
Unless Trump had a random moment of insanity and just forked over a DNA sample willingly, with a clear statement saying "go ahead and test it".
No. If you throw tour dna away willingly then theyre in the clear
This is only very partially correct. They're free to test the random, anonymous DNA sample they've recovered, yes, but have no way to prove is the Trump's because there is no chain of custody of said sample, there's no database with Trump's DNA that is accessible for this purpose to use for a comparison, the sample has not been collected in a controlled environment, and there's absolutely no way to legally prove it hasn't been either contaminated or belongs to someone else outright without, again, obtaining a consenting sample directly from Trump. It doesn't matter if they collected the sample from Trump's favorite coffee mug that says "If you want a DNA sample from Trump, use this mug", because the DNA could belong to anybody, or more likely several anybodies, on the planet.
The very best you could do is prove that the sample of DNA from the the discarded item matches what is on the dress, which still does nothing whatsoever to actually incriminate Trump. It might, possibly, be enough to convince a judge to issue a warrant to force the issue, if the accused was an average person and this was a criminal case. Since the accused is a) probably the single most corrupt individual to ever hold the office of President and b) extremely wealthy, the odds are extremely low that his lawyers would not be able to easily avoid having their client be forced to submit to testing based on such circumstantial evidence.
The failure here isn't the restrictions on collecting DNA, it's on society at large for letting Trump get away with this shit for decades because he's rich and white. This is not something where anybody should want lax restrictions, unless they also want cops to be able to test the DNA of any random innocent just in case they're linked to a crime (which is absolutely illegal now and is basically what people are describing for this scenario).
If Trump does not offer up a clean, controlled sample in some way or a judge doesn't force the issue (and even then, lawyers will fight it), then there is no way to legally link him to a DNA sample on a dress.
Today in Bill Barr's monumental corruption, he's decided DOJ is Trump's personal attorney in the E. Jean Carroll lawsuit, which arises from actions from years before Trump was president.
And here's her lawyer's reply, from Carroll herself:
This is another "run out the clock" play, as they know full well there's no grounds to appeal the court ruling that no, being President doesn't make you immune.
Nostradamus over here.
He's just stalling until after the election. After that it won't matter.
After the last four years, that sentence is terrifying
Using the lawyer meant to be in charge of the counties crucial legal cases to protect himself from a civil rape accusation, it’s like the worst move he could have made, from a moral and political perspective, hell maybe even from a legal perspective