235 Years

Much of the country had no idea how miserable and desperate these people have been, manipulated by the voices they trust.
It is a unfortunate turn of events of epic magnitude that they now look to someone to ease their pain who has no interest in them. "I don't care about you, just your vote." A telling Freudian slip to add to the things The Following will forgive Orange Jesus for.
 
It is a unfortunate turn of events of epic magnitude that they now look to someone to ease their pain who has no interest in them. "I don't care about you, just your vote." A telling Freudian slip to add to the things The Following will forgive Orange Jesus for.
who's handing out free tuition?
 
Is the problem that you simply can read?

Are there no reading for comprehension classes available to you?
I've just explained to you EXACTLY what to read in your own citation and what it's practical criminal prosecution implications are.

In response you are teling me..to read. That's it, thats the entirety of your response.

Fucked in the head much?
 
I've just explained to you EXACTLY what to read in your own citation and what it's practical criminal prosecution implications are.

In response you are teling me..to read. That's it, thats the entirety of your response.

Fucked in the head much?
so you can't quote the ruling?
 
Your pretzel twisting is self-evident.
Your lack of self-awareness prevents you from recognizing that.
Your FLAILING about BRIBES describes Biden, not Trump.
"Son of a bitch, they fired him."
:eusa_hand:

yes yes, I'm super bad. You just don't know how to put on big boy pants to actually prove it.

It describes ANY POTUS as it relates to possibility of criminal prosecution for their official acts dum dum.

It DOES NOT relate to a Vice President who said "Son of a bitch, they fired him"
 
Last edited:
Then why did the orange slob demand it from the courts?

Seems like you need to send your memo to him.

Because Obama III's lawfare would have made it IMPOSSIBLE for ANY President to serve.

Without qualified Immunity, Dubya, Obama, Clinton and Biden would be subject to tens of thousands of lawsuits
 
George Washington's first term began in 1789. Since then, 235 years, no President has asked for absolute immunity, much less received it.

I wonder why it's needed, so badly, now
It’s very simple…. Go back and look at how many things Washington and those other early Presidents actually did. It’s a very small number.

The difference is that other POTUS has their hands in so many different things (most of which they shouldn’t) that they want protection.
 
Do lefties even understand the meaning of the word "absolute"? The Supreme Court did not grant "absolute" immunity to the president. It affirmed immunity for official acts. Regardless of the ignorance of history demonstrated by the angry left, every president since Washington has had immunity from prosecution of official acts. The United States would become a Banana Republic if one party brought criminal charges against the opposite party when they disagreed with an official act by the president Maybe that's what ignorant lefties want.
 
It’s very simple…. Go back and look at how many things Washington and those other early Presidents actually did. It’s a very small number.

The difference is that other POTUS has their hands in so many different things (most of which they shouldn’t) that they want protection.
Fair enough.

But this isn't "they". It's "he". And he is what he is. Convictions, sexual assault adjudications, frauds, and all.
 
Because Obama III's lawfare would have made it IMPOSSIBLE for ANY President to serve.
You go ahead and name one other president that committed these crimes while in office.

This stupid talking point isn't going to fly.

And now you can retract your earlier statement about progressives and substitute the orange pile of shit. Thanks.
 
Do lefties even understand the meaning of the word "absolute"? The Supreme Court did not grant "absolute" immunity to the president. It affirmed immunity for official acts.

Absolute immunity relating to core official acts - thats what we are talking about, what are you talking about?

According to this ruling a president can take a very large gift for a pardon (aka bribe) and can never face criminal prosecution for it.

True or false?
 
You go ahead and name one other president that committed these crimes while in office.

This stupid talking point isn't going to fly.

So now you can retract your statement about progressives and substitute the orange pile of shit. Thanks.
Trump is a criminal. And that's why he doesn't want to be held accountable for his actions.

They can play the denial game all they want.

criminal​

[ krim-uh-nl ]
Phonetic (Standard)IPA

adjective​

  1. of the nature of or involving crime.
    Synonyms: unlawful, felonious
    Antonyms: lawful
  2. guilty of crime.
    Antonyms: innocent
 
Presidents had criminal immunity from clearly corrupt offical acts?

No dipshit, they did not untill this ruling.

There was exactly nothing preventing a prosecutor from bringing criminal charges against an ex-POTUS for taking a bribe for a pardon before this ruling.

No, immunity for performing their presidential duties.

They had it all along, it just had to be quantified due to unprecedented lawfare from you shitheads.
 
Because you say so? Please.

Still waiting for your citation of Roberts opinion, that you supposedly read. :auiqs.jpg:

I'm sure I'll be waiting for a long time, because I know you are a lazy bs peddler.

Still waiting for you to not be a whiny bitchy SJW twat.

It's been years.
 
Trump is a criminal. And that's why he doesn't want to be held accountable for his actions.

They can play the denial game all they want.

criminal​


[ krim-uh-nl ]
Phonetic (Standard)IPA

adjective​

  1. of the nature of or involving crime.
    Synonyms: unlawful, felonious
    Antonyms: lawful
  2. guilty of crime.
    Antonyms: innocent
And these frauds want to waste everyone's time parsing the decision and regurgitating talking points about it.

When all they know and care about is that it helps the orange mangod avoid accountability.
 
And these frauds want to waste everyone's time parsing the decision and regurgitating talking points about it.

When all they know and care about is that it helps the orange mangod avoid accountability.
And again, they're at war. They'll side with a criminal if it will help them defeat (what they're told is) evil.

Good vs. Evil. They're the "Good", by the way.
 

Forum List

Back
Top