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

[Lisa558]

Presidents can’t take whatever they want. That’s the whole point of the presidential records act.

Yes, they can declassify anything they want, as authorized by the PRA.

And you deflected: Biden took classified docs when he was a senator.

 

[Rawley]

Nothing dubious about them.

Well, you didn't think the 1512 counts were dubious either.

 

[Marener]

Yes, they can declassify anything they want, as authorized by the PRA.

If he ever says he declassified them, then you can make that argument.

 

[Marener]

Well, you didn't think the 1512 counts were dubious either.

Feel free to describe what’s dubious about them. until then, I have no response to your ad hominem.

 

[para bellum]

I read the indictment which is how I was able to factually refute your argument.

Except each count references the same proceeding, lol.

For the record, in 2016 Democrats put up a slate of alternate electors, raised objections during the counting, and tried to get Vice President Biden to count the alternate electors.

Biden rightfully refused, just as Pence did in 2020.

Trump can show that the same things he is being accused of were done by the dems in 2016, and were not prosecuted. That is grounds for dismissal for selective prosecution when they get to the fact finding phase...

 

[BlindBoo]

Yup Fatass Fani is bizarrely and absurdly interpreting the common word "find" to mean illegally manufacturing ballots.

Regardless of the DA's physical attributes, Benedict Donald tried to persuade a public official to alter the States Certified vote total long after the Electoral College had voted.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Except each count references the same proceeding, lol.

For the record, in 2016 Democrats put up a slate of alternate electors, raised objections during the counting, and tried to get Vice President Biden to count the alternate electors.

Biden rightfully refused, just as Pence did in 2020.

Trump can show that the same things he is being accused of were done by the dems in 2016, and were not prosecuted. That is grounds for dismissal for selective prosecution when they get to the fact finding phase...

Yup it is completely legal to have alternate electors when you plan to challenge the current electors which is what was done.

 

[Lisa558]

If he ever says he declassified them, then you can make that argument.

He said he did.

 

[Rawley]

Feel free to describe what’s dubious about them. until then, I have no response to your ad hominem.

JFC, has someone else been on your keyboard for the past hour?

 

[BS Filter]

Well, someone said that Trump was declared “100% innocent” which was a bald face lie.

The SCOTUS decision is totally irrelevant here. I have no idea why it was even brought up.

Trump is 100% innocent. Everyone in this country is innocent until proven guilty. Is that right or not?

 

[Rawley]

Regardless of the DA's physical attributes, Benedict Donald tried to persuade a public official to alter the States Certified vote total long after the Electoral College had voted.

No he didn't

 

[Marener]

For the record, in 2016 Democrats put up a slate of alternate electors, raised objections during the counting, and tried to get Vice President Biden to count the alternate electors.

This is not true. There were no fake electors in 2016. Objections during the electoral count in 2016 would not have resulted in the counting of any other electors.

Trump can show that the same things he is being accused of were done by the dems in 2016, and were not prosecuted. That is grounds for dismissal for selective prosecution when they get to the fact finding phase...

This is untrue. There were no fake electors in 2016. No one was trying to get Biden to submit fake electors. No one was trying to get state legislatures to change vote tallies. They most certainly weren’t going it with lies regarding nonexistent election fraud. These are all essential elements in the charges against him.

 

[Marener]

He said he did.

Ive followed the court proceedings very carefully and when the issue came up, his lawyers refused to answer.

 

[BlindBoo]

Except each count references the same proceeding, lol.

For the record, in 2016 Democrats put up a slate of alternate electors, raised objections during the counting, and tried to get Vice President Biden to count the alternate electors.

Biden rightfully refused, just as Pence did in 2020.

Trump can show that the same things he is being accused of were done by the dems in 2016, and were not prosecuted. That is grounds for dismissal for selective prosecution when they get to the fact finding phase...

For the record there were no valid objections raised on Jan 6th 2017 and his boss was not pressuring him to not accept any valid EC vote from any state.

Clinton didn't send a MOB of her followers to the Capitol either. No alterative slates of Democrat electors claiming they were duly elected in their states either.

 

[Marener]

Trump is 100% innocent. Everyone in this country is innocent until proven guilty. Is that right or not?

Again, you’re avoiding the point that the SCOTUS decision yesterday is not relevant to anything being discussed and was inaccurately characterized by another poster.

 

[BlindBoo]

And we go after Biden, and Newsom and Harris and ... Karma's a bitch.

Will your guys still be relying on the Russian Ministry of Propaganda for evidence against them?

 

[WEATHER53]

The ruling had nothing to do with the facts of Trump’s alleged insurrection.

They didn’t declare him “innocent“.

They didn’t declare him OrangeMan either.
Both equally irrelevant feeler noob

 

[Rawley]

Will your guys still be relying on the Russian Ministry of Propaganda for evidence against them?

Sure why not, it worked for your cult. As you guys are arguing, if they are innocent, they have no worries. No harm, no foul.

 

[Marener]

They didn’t declare him OrangeMan either.
Both equally irrelevant feeler noob

This is what you said, and it’s very inaccurate.

They were ruling on Colorado's bullshit and Trump was declared 100% innocent from being prohibited to be on the ballot

The SCOTUS decision has nothing to do with the legality of Trump’s behavior.

 

[BlindBoo]

He wasn't pardoned until 1974, moron. Over two years after he resigned the office.

Contrary to known reality. He was pardoned a month after resigning office. He resigned on Aug. 8th 1974 and Ford issued him a pardon on Sept 8th 1974.