BREAKING: Supreme Court rules Trump is entitled to some immunity in Jan. 6 case

If he is defeated. the trials will continue with plenty of non-official and non-core constitutional exceptions to convict him in the other three trials.

If he wins, the GA case of false electors, voter suppression, will continue when he leaves office.
 
WTF?

Al-Awlaki wasn't murdered, he was in a war zone and not part of any relief efforts in Yemen.


It is a criminal offense under this section for a U.S. national to murder another U.S. national outside the United States, if the murder occurred within the jurisdiction of a foreign country.

A foreign national is: An individual who is: (1) not a citizen of the United States and (2) not lawfully admitted for permanent residence (as defined in 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(20)); or. A foreign principal, as defined in 22 U.S.C.

1719850295239.png
Politico
https://www.politico.com › under-the-radar › 2012/11

Nov 28, 2012 — About six months before alleged Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula leader Anwar Al-Awlaki was killed in a drone strike in Yemen last year, ...

None of this has anything to do with Russia. Stay on topic.
Are they not, part of the world?
 
The constitution grants the president powers the rest of us do not enjoy.... official duty is all the court said today... this ends Smith's case

Fake electors, pressuring states, riots on the capital, failure to surrender classified documents after leaving office - are not official duties.

or in the least it pushes it way past the election when we will have new leadership at the DOJ...
Its over....

Thank you for being honest about what this was all about. Pushing it past the election so the people can't make an informed decision.

Good show.

WW
 
The tenth amendment is at play here

Tenth Amendment​

Tenth Amendment Explained


The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
The Constitution gives authority to Congress (Article I, Section 2) to discipline a President in the President's official duties or failure to do his official duty and nobody else. You can't get around that with the 10th Amendment.
 
WTF?

Al-Awlaki wasn't murdered, he was in a war zone and not part of any relief efforts in Yemen.


It is a criminal offense under this section for a U.S. national to murder another U.S. national outside the United States, if the murder occurred within the jurisdiction of a foreign country.

A foreign national is: An individual who is: (1) not a citizen of the United States and (2) not lawfully admitted for permanent residence (as defined in 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(20)); or. A foreign principal, as defined in 22 U.S.C.

View attachment 969995
Politico
https://www.politico.com › under-the-radar › 2012/11
Nov 28, 2012 — About six months before alleged Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula leader Anwar Al-Awlaki was killed in a drone strike in Yemen last year, ...


Are they not, part of the world?

Trump supporters support his illegal actions and you do the same for Obama. Another example of the two sides not really being any different.
 
The Constitution gives authority to Congress to discipline a President and nobody else. You can't get around that with the 10th Amendment.

No it doesn't. As a matter of it specifically says that someone removed from office is open for indictment and trial. Which of course is a criminal prosecution in court.

WW
 
1 min ago

Here's how the different Supreme Court justices voted on the Trump immunity case​

From CNN's Michelle Shen and Annette Choi
In a landmark decision with implications on the presidential race, six Supreme Court justices ruled that Donald Trump should have limited immunity from criminal prosecution, specifically on “official” actions taken during his presidency, punting it to the lower courts to determine what actions are considered official or unofficial. Three justices dissented.
Justices Roberts, Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett made up the majority opinion, while Justices Sotomayor, Kagan and Jackson made up the minority.
 
19 min ago

Tension palpable inside Supreme Court as historic Trump immunity decision is revealed​

From CNN’s Yahya Abou-Ghazala and John Fritze

The tension inside the Supreme Court’s ornate courtroom was palpable from the minute the justices took their seats on Monday.

As she announced the first opinion of the day – a case dealing with a Federal Reserve regulation – Justice Amy Coney Barrett quipped that she knew it wasn’t the decision everyone was waiting on, prompting chuckles from inside the room.

Minutes later, as Chief Justice John Roberts read the majority opinion in the immunity case, veteran Supreme Court litigator Michael Dreeben, who represented the special counsel in the case, vigorously took notes but wore a poker face that revealed little about his thoughts.

Justice Clarence Thomas sat upright and uncharacteristically still throughout the reading of the opinion – a stark contrast to the beginning of the hearing, when the stalwart conservative was leaning far back in his chair, as he often does, rocking back contemplatively.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh listened attentively, looking directly at Roberts and Justice Sonia Sotomayor as they read their respective opinions the courtroom. Others took notes and occasionally looked down or off into the courtroom.

Perhaps underscoring the jitters that can often accompany such an historic moment, Roberts misspoke while thanking his colleagues, referring to them as his “employees” before correcting himself.

The courtroom and justices erupted into laughter – a sharp relief from the atmosphere of tense anticipation that characterized the morning.

Roberts read through the administrative announcements after all of the opinions were released, noting that the court would hand down an orders list on Tuesday morning.
 
Trump supporters support his illegal actions and you do the same for Obama. Another example of the two sides not really being any different.
Sure....................
Post the law where an American civilian, in a war zone is, supposed to be protected...........(after the US revoked a passport)
Maybe, even WITH one.
UNDER US LAW?
When you enter a war zone, on your own, with no definitive or recognized mission, you're a target of war.
 
Sure....................
Post the law where an American civilian, in a war zone is, supposed to be protected...........(after the US revoked a passport)
Maybe, even WITH one.
UNDER US LAW?
When you enter a war zone, on your own, with no definitive or recognized mission, you're a target of war.

I posted the law. All American citizens regardless of where they are at have due process protections afforded by the Constitution.
 
No it doesn't. As a matter of it specifically says that someone removed from office is open for indictment and trial. Which of course is a criminal prosecution in court.

WW
But the intention was the the President not be subject to prosecution unless impeached by the House and removed from office by the Senate. Nobody else is given authority to remove a President or prosecute him in his official duties. That was certainly the position of the Founders who wrote and signed the Constitution.

And with this SCOTUS ruling today, it is clear that nobody can prosecute him for anything he does in his official duties after he leaves office without the impeachment process and Senate trial first coming into play. While several presidents have now been impeached, not one was ever removed from office by the Senate.
 

Forum List

Back
Top