Starkiller Posted January 10, 2024 Report Share Posted January 10, 2024 OK Joe, you hear that? https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4398223-trump-team-argues-assassination-of-rivals-is-covered-by-presidential-immunity/amp/ Former President Trump’s legal team suggested Tuesday that even a president directing SEAL Team Six to kill a political opponent would be an action barred from prosecution given a former executive’s broad immunity to criminal prosecution. In the hearing that reviewed a motion from Trump’s team to toss his election interference charges, Sauer argued that presidents can only be criminally prosecuted if they have already been tried and convicted by the Senate. OILERMAN, MadMax, and begooode 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WG53 Posted January 10, 2024 Report Share Posted January 10, 2024 What is the constitutional basis for stating anyone gets immunity from committing crime if they hold office? OILERMAN, and MadMax 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nine Posted January 10, 2024 Report Share Posted January 10, 2024 Why is Trump's attorney even broaching the subject of presidential immunity? Prosecution is reserved for those who have committed a crime.....and Donald Trump has repeatedly assured Americans that he did nothing wrong and did everything perfectly. Did his lawyer not get the memo? Or is he simply acknowledging that Trump's guilt is a foregone conclusion? MadMax 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starkiller Posted January 11, 2024 Report Share Posted January 11, 2024 It’s just a delaying tactic. They know they won’t win, but they can delay the trial. MadMax 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post ctm Posted February 6, 2024 Popular Post Report Share Posted February 6, 2024 Immunity denied in unamious decision by court of appeals. Further, Trump must appeal to supreme court by Mon. the 12th or case goes back to trial judge. reo, titanruss, begooode, and 3 others 5 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
reo Posted February 6, 2024 Report Share Posted February 6, 2024 1 hour ago, ctm said: Immunity denied in unamious decision by court of appeals. Further, Trump must appeal to supreme court by Mon. the 12th or case goes back to trial judge. I bet the Supreme Court doesn't even hear the case. TitansPDO, IsntLifeFunny, and Starkiller 2 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ctm Posted February 6, 2024 Report Share Posted February 6, 2024 15 minutes ago, reo said: I bet the Supreme Court doesn't even hear the case. They didn't want to hear the case once before. J Smith filed a motion to skip the court of appeals and send Trump's appeal straight to the Supremes. They declined to hear Trump's motion. reo 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
reo Posted February 6, 2024 Report Share Posted February 6, 2024 18 minutes ago, ctm said: They didn't want to hear the case once before. J Smith filed a motion to skip the court of appeals and send Trump's appeal straight to the Supremes. They declined to hear Trump's motion. Yeah but that could also mean they just wanted it to go through the lower courts first. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamalisms Posted February 6, 2024 Report Share Posted February 6, 2024 46 minutes ago, reo said: Yeah but that could also mean they just wanted it to go through the lower courts first. That was my assumption. reo 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Little Earl Posted February 6, 2024 Report Share Posted February 6, 2024 3 hours ago, reo said: I bet the Supreme Court doesn't even hear the case. The Supreme Court might hear this and should. Immunity for a president is necessary to some degree. That is why Congress and judges have some degree of immunity. It just took a bunch of libtard judges in DC to rule with a partisan hand against Trump saying there is none. The Supreme Court needs to say what certain actions are subject to immunity and what are not. reo, OILERMAN, and IsntLifeFunny 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsntLifeFunny Posted February 6, 2024 Report Share Posted February 6, 2024 (edited) 45 minutes ago, Little Earl said: The Supreme Court might hear this and should. Immunity for a president is necessary to some degree. That is why Congress and judges have some degree of immunity. It just took a bunch of libtard judges in DC to rule with a partisan hand against Trump saying there is none. The Supreme Court needs to say what certain actions are subject to immunity and what are not. Besides the fact all of this is wrong, one of the judges was appointed by Bush. Or is Bush now considered a libtard because he doesn't fellate Trump like you and your band of sycophants? Presidents have wide immunity. That isn't the discussion. The discussion is if in their capacity as President they attempt to overturn the rule of law if they can be prosecuted. 3 Appeals judges not only said yes to that question, they bitch slapped Trump's lawyer in court and with their writing in the decision. The Supreme Court will uphold any decision if they decide to take it up. It's really fucking simple: the President is not a King. Edited February 6, 2024 by IsntLifeFunny Omar, Starkiller, and ChemEngr79 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ctm Posted February 6, 2024 Report Share Posted February 6, 2024 Trump argued he could assignate a political rival and it would be legal. Starkiller, OILERMAN, and IsntLifeFunny 2 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Little Earl Posted February 6, 2024 Report Share Posted February 6, 2024 9 minutes ago, IsntLifeFunny said: Besides the fact all of this is wrong, one of the judges was appointed by Bush. Or is Bush now considered a libtard because he doesn't fellate Trump like you and your band of sycophants? Presidents have wide immunity. That isn't the discussion. The discussion is if in their capacity as President they attempt to overturn the rule of law if they can be prosecuted. 3 Appeals judges not only said yes to that question, they bitch slapped Trump's lawyer in court and with their writing in the decision. The Supreme Court will uphold any decision if they decide to take it up. It's really fucking simple: the President is not a King. It’s not that simple and that is not what they ruled. The court rejected all Presidential immunity. I never said the USSC should rule that Trump is protected in this case, but that they shouldn’t let the court ruling stand as it is. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsntLifeFunny Posted February 6, 2024 Report Share Posted February 6, 2024 7 minutes ago, Little Earl said: It’s not that simple and that is not what they ruled. The court rejected all Presidential immunity. I never said the USSC should rule that Trump is protected in this case, but that they shouldn’t let the court ruling stand as it is. You called them libtards....one of the judges was appointed by Bush, ergo that judge is also one, no? Words have meaning. And yes, they absolutely bitch slapped Trump's position and his lawyers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justafan Posted February 6, 2024 Report Share Posted February 6, 2024 30 minutes ago, ctm said: Trump argued he could assignate a political rival and it would be legal. This was so absurd I had to look it up because it didn't even sound real. 100% real. Just when you think this clown has lost every last bit of decency possible, he finds a way to dig a little deeper. OILERMAN 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.