And now on to the more serious question of immunity. . .

[BS Filter]

And this is exactly why the SCOTUS took up the matter. A POTUS is a class of one, and his immunity is different than the normal qualified immunity of public servants.

How different is what the court is going to answer.

The pitiful minion's thinking only goes as far as "Get Trump".

 

[para bellum]

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit reversed and reinstated the charges against Fischer (as well as those against two other men). It ruled that “nder the most natural reading of the statute,” the law “applies to all forms of corrupt obstruction of an official proceeding, other than the conduct that is already covered by” the evidence-tampering provision.

And this is why the SCOTUS granted cert...

 

[Rawley]

Here is the relevant brief Rawley. Trump's objection to Smith's petition for cert before the appeal.

The claim of "absolute immunity for all criminal acts" is made-up bullshit.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-624/293865/20231220140543301_23-624%20-%20U.S.%20v.%20Trump%20-%20Brief%20in%20Opposition%20to%20Petition%20for%20Certiorari%20Before%20Judgment%20-%20Filed.pdf

Thanks. I thought so, since so many loon talking heads were the only ones framing the case this way.

 

[Lisa558]

I expect the SCOTUS will make a very narrow ruling with some generic standards for where and when immunity exists and kick it back down for the trial court to have to have a hearing on. There is no way in hell they are going to rule that that the president can do whatever the hell he wants whenever he wants and can never be held to account for it.

Well of course a president can’t do whatever the hell he wants and never be held accountable. He can’t commit treason, take bribes, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.

But to be able to go after a president for decisions that turned out poorly would effectively handcuff him. That’s no way to run a country.

 

[Marener]

In general, yes. Upon conviction criminal charges may be brought.

Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.

Trump was impeached and acquitted for the acts he is being charged with criminally. That has never happened before, which is why the SCOTUS has taken up the case.

"The application for a stay presented to The Chief Justice
is referred by him to the Court. The Special Counsel’s request
to treat the stay application as a petition for a writ of
certiorari is granted, and that petition is granted limited to
the following question: Whether and if so to what extent does a
former President enjoy presidential immunity from criminal
prosecution for conduct alleged to involve official acts during
his tenure in office. Without expressing a view on the merits,
this Court directs the Court of Appeals to continue withholding
issuance of the mandate until the sending down of the judgment of
this Court. The application for a stay is dismissed as moot."

If theres a way to criminally charge him, then whatever immunity you think he has isn’t “absolute”.

 

[para bellum]

Thanks. I thought so, since so many loon talking heads were the only ones framing the case this way.

Haha, that's always the first clue...

 

[WEATHER53]

So we can indict Obama for bombing a wedding and bombing doctors. Cool.

What the dim bulbs fail to comprehend is that they are pursuing Trump for a thought crime And what their feelings are about that
Trump would have to have knowingly and willfully committed prescribed illegal acts. There is no proof of that. So lib loons feel that they don’t like some things he did and that he had “malice aforethought ”(supposition mind reading) so they will go after that almost solely to prevent him from running and Not to punish any true illegality.

 

[Rawley]

One. Trump isn’t charged with that specific offense and the nature of Trump’s charges different considerably from the case you offered.

Exact same charges under the exact same statute. Two of the four charges by Comrade Smith.

In the J6 cases, DC Circuit tossed it out and Appeals court reversed - which is why SC took it up

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

And, he wasn't a candidate on J6, he was President of the United States.

But wasn't performing any acts in the capacity of his office. In fact, he did the opposite and was utterly derelict.

Nope, Trump was just a felon committing felonies in his spare time, that day.

 

[para bellum]

If theres a way to criminally charge him, then whatever immunity you think he has isn’t “absolute”.

Do not presume to know what level of immunity I may think a POTUS has.

That's the question before the SCOTUS.

Can Obama be charged with killing a US citizen?

What is the extent of the immunity? The court will answer that, not you or I.

 

[Marener]

Well of course a president can’t do whatever the hell he wants and never be held accountable. He can’t commit treason, take bribes, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.

They can as long as the president has a handful of Senators willing to give him a pass.

According to Trump.

 

[Marener]

Do not presume to know what level of immunity I may think a POTUS has.

That's the question before the SCOTUS.

Can Obama be charged with killing a US citizen?

What is the extent of the immunity? The court will answer that, not you or I.

Okay dude. Whatever.

 

[Marener]

Exact same charges under the exact same statute. Two of the four charges by Comrade Smith.

In the J6 cases, DC Circuit tossed it out and Appeals court reversed - which is why SC took it up

Your original claim Is almost entirely inaccurate.

Guess that's why the uber liberal DC Circuit has tossed out the core of COmrade Smith's J6th case. LOL

The district judge was a Trump appointee, clerked for Thomas, Federalist Society member. No an “Uber liberal”

The circuit court reverse the charge being tossed out.

18 USC 1512 is not the core of the case. 18 USC 371 is.

The ruling didn’t affect Smith’s case whatsoever.

 

[para bellum]

The pitiful minion's thinking only goes as far as "Get Trump".

Sadly, yes. This is why impeaching a president is now normalized as a political weapon.

 

[Marener]

The pitiful minion's thinking only goes as far as "Get Trump".

What Trump did to the country after the 2020 election was wrong, and criminal. All I want is accountability so no one ever tries that bullshit again.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Sadly, yes. This is why impeaching a president is now normalized as a political weapon.

Only according to Trump cultists. Both of Trump's impeachents were for high crimes supported by a mountain of evidence. But the senators are beholden to his cult.

40 years ago he would have been shamed and tossed from office by any senate, democrat or republican.

 

[noonereal]

constitutionalist

Means living in a time and place that no longer exists.

 

[noonereal]

Impeachment is a POLITICAL process and NOT a criminal process

Amazing how few understand this.

 

[para bellum]

18 USC 1512 is not the core of the case. 18 USC 371 is.

Um, no. Two of the 4 counts are 18 USC 1512, obstruction. The other two counts are conspiracy charges.

Toss out the obstruction, the conspiracy charges melt away.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

The court will rule he has immunity on somethings and not on others.