US supreme court rules Trump has ‘absolute immunity’ for official acts
- Thread starter Hume
- Start date
Treason is now legal.
There is no "if"
So you must be happy - the open treason by Biden is protected.
The founders created immunity - so Obama wouldn't be prosecuted for Murder for allowing Seal Team 6 to kill Bin Laden.
You wanted to pervert the Constitution to "GET TRUMP." This with the understanding that party members would never be subject to the insanity used against enemies of the party.
I guess your weaponization of the federal government to oppress the opposition is coming to an end. What will your party do now? How will you crush those who would dare challenge your power?
That is not true, Justices don’t p...ll,of them to write a decision “for the ages”
Where did the Founders create immunity?
Well, according to the decision Trump’s Court just rendered, he possibly could, saying he was doing it as an official act because Trump represented a threat to our democracy
Motive cannot be considered, according to Court.
You are happy that a president is above the law?
That’s just crazy!
No immunity from impeachment, yet.
Psychology. People who fear the world want someone to comfort them.
Goes against our legal system.
But it is not that easy, one has to show why whatever the act was wasn’t official, and the President is granted leeway as to determining if it was official or he “presumed” it was official
And if you didn’t, you would just say you did, so, what does it matter
Trump broke the law by withholding aid Congress approved.
It's a document you and your party reject, we call it "The United States Constitution." No surprise you've never heard of it, you're a democrat.
You prefer a third world dictatorship, where you show Jack Smith the man, and he finds the crime. Hey, North Korea has what you desire - the USA no longer does.
False and spurious.
A president murdering a US citizen is not engaged in official acts but in illegal enterprises. Try reading the decision.
Bottom Line:
"In a footnote to its immunity decision, the Supreme Court appeared to say that the federal cases against Donald Trump cannot continue if he returns to the White House.
“In the criminal context … the Justice Department ‘has long recognized’ that ‘the separation of powers precludes the criminal prosecution of a sitting President,’” Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote.
"In a footnote to its immunity decision, the Supreme Court appeared to say that the federal cases against Donald Trump cannot continue if he returns to the White House.
“In the criminal context … the Justice Department ‘has long recognized’ that ‘the separation of powers precludes the criminal prosecution of a sitting President,’” Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote.