Jump to content

Should Presidents have absolute immunity for life?


Should Presidents have absolute immunity for life?  

19 members have voted

  1. 1. Should Presidents have absolute immunity for life?

    • Yes
      2
    • No
      17


Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Trump is going to jail 


I don’t think he will ever see jail time and that’s fine.

 

I just want him banned from ever being POTUS again in the future.

 

Unfit

Corrupt AF

Compromised AF

Nazi

 

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, BillStime said:


I don’t think he will ever see jail time and that’s fine.

 

I just want him banned from ever being POTUS again in the future.

 

Unfit

Corrupt AF

Compromised AF

Nazi

 

I dunno, the prosecutors are sure trying to get his ass tossed in jail. We shall see. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/16/2024 at 12:25 PM, BillStime said:

 

 

No they shouldn't and that is the exact reason why Joe should be in court right now because of all the lies about not knowing anything about Hunters business deals & why he got paid and he lied about that . It needs to be equal across the board bring as much down n him as they have the orange man then i'll be good with it .

 

This double standard BS is for the birds everything is treated differently with him, A VP is not allowed to take documents but he did and stored them where a KNOWN cocaine addict that worked directly for a Communist Chinese company but there investigation was little of nothing WTF ??? 

 

The New American Justice system at it's best !!! 

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Conald was corrupt before his tenure in the White House.

 

He remained corrupt during his presidency.

 

And Conald continues to be corrupt today.

 

Donnie, are you suggesting that after nearly 250 years as a country, presidents require immunity now?

 

GTFOH 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, BillStime said:

Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson just destroyed Trump's lawyer.

 

 


Trump’s lawyers know they are going to lose this battle. Their arguments are ridiculous. 
 

But they are going to win the war. Their goal isn’t to win the cases, it’s simply to delay them. This hearing has already delayed the case despite the fact that the Special Counsel asked SCOTUS to hear this issue months ago but they declined. 
 

What Trump’s team is hoping for here is a remand. It’d be pointless because there is no reading of the Constitution or law that makes overturning an election an official act, but it would mean that Chutkin would have to make that ruling. As soon as she does, Trump will appeal, eventually all of the way up to SCOTUS. 
 

By then, it’ll be too late to have the trial by the election, depriving the public of knowledge as to whether or not Trump is guilty. 

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Eyeroll 1
  • Awesome! (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:


Trump’s lawyers know they are going to lose this battle. Their arguments are ridiculous. 
 

But they are going to win the war. Their goal isn’t to win the cases, it’s simply to delay them. This hearing has already delayed the case despite the fact that the Special Counsel asked SCOTUS to hear this issue months ago but they declined. 
 

What Trump’s team is hoping for here is a remand. It’d be pointless because there is no reading of the Constitution or law that makes overturning an election an official act, but it would mean that Chutkin would have to make that ruling. As soon as she does, Trump will appeal, eventually all of the way up to SCOTUS. 
 

By then, it’ll be too late to have the trial by the election, depriving the public of knowledge as to whether or not Trump is guilty. 

 

100%

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:


Trump’s lawyers know they are going to lose this battle. Their arguments are ridiculous. 
 

But they are going to win the war. Their goal isn’t to win the cases, it’s simply to delay them. This hearing has already delayed the case despite the fact that the Special Counsel asked SCOTUS to hear this issue months ago but they declined. 
 

What Trump’s team is hoping for here is a remand. It’d be pointless because there is no reading of the Constitution or law that makes overturning an election an official act, but it would mean that Chutkin would have to make that ruling. As soon as she does, Trump will appeal, eventually all of the way up to SCOTUS. 
 

By then, it’ll be too late to have the trial by the election, depriving the public of knowledge as to whether or not Trump is guilty. 

Which is why trump will do absolutely anything including fomenting a civil war to get in the white house and pardon himself and/or throw out the cases....He's betting his life on "winning"

  • Disagree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, BillStime said:

Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson just destroyed Trump's lawyer.

 

 

True. Trump's lawyer just conceded enough to make it clear that the case will be sent back to the District (trial) Court to decide what alleged actions constitute "official acts" and which are "private acts."

Makes you wonder why the Supreme Court saw any need to step into the process too early, thereby delaying the trial ...

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, The Frankish Reich said:

Makes you wonder why the Supreme Court

 

Does it?

 

I mean, you have the MAGA contingency of the court looking out for one person - and one person only.

 

History will not be kind to MAGA.

 

 

 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/25/2024 at 10:33 AM, The Frankish Reich said:

True. Trump's lawyer just conceded enough to make it clear that the case will be sent back to the District (trial) Court to decide what alleged actions constitute "official acts" and which are "private acts."

Makes you wonder why the Supreme Court saw any need to step into the process too early, thereby delaying the trial ...

 

This SCOTUS believes in states rights unless the state is doing something it doesn't like; originalism unless the original meaning of a law is something it doesn't like; textualism unless the text doesn't say what they want it to say; precedents are things to ignore or overturn; judges are historians, scientists, and medical experts...

 

Attempts to understand a consistent jurisprudence for this court fails against just thinking about what it is that the GOP would want.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fascist are so exited hearing their use of the legal system might work to throw the election.

 

But like all the other times the same voices said the same things, they will need to come up with a conspiracy of why it didnt work soon.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The whole immunity thing is ridiculous.  So is the pardoning himself thing.  If either were true, a president could do ANYTHING they wanted.  If they don't have immunity, they could just simply pardon themselves before or after they commit the crime.  Complete nonsense, and we have a SCOTUS so corrupt, they're actually hearing it.  Why did Ford pardon Nixon, when he could have just pardoned himself???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, daz28 said:

The whole immunity thing is ridiculous.  So is the pardoning himself thing.  If either were true, a president could do ANYTHING they wanted.  If they don't have immunity, they could just simply pardon themselves before or after they commit the crime.  Complete nonsense, and we have a SCOTUS so corrupt, they're actually hearing it.  Why did Ford pardon Nixon, when he could have just pardoned himself???

 

To believe the immunity argument that Trump's lawyers are pushing, you would have to believe that the Founders, having just finished a war against a King, created a president that could have their political opponents killed and threaten or coerce Congress into not impeaching them (which might be successful if they were on a murder spree) and there would be absolutely nothing anybody could do about it.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tommy Callahan said:

The fascist are so exited hearing their use of the legal system might work to throw the election.

 

But like all the other times the same voices said the same things, they will need to come up with a conspiracy of why it didnt work soon.

 

 

You. are calling the people that DON'T want a president to be above the law "fascists." 

 

There's a reason you clowns keep losing elections. You are not tethered to reality. You are coo coo, nuts, bonkers 

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Disagree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...