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

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Should I cut the poor little troll loose?

Okay.

"The overwhelming majority of the approximately 1,000 people who have been convicted of or pleaded guilty to Capitol riot-related federal crimes were not charged with obstruction and will not be affected by the outcome."

"For around 50 people who were convicted, obstruction was the only felony count, prosecutors said. " - AP

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The right respects institutions and wants to maintain them..

Hahahaha

Holy shit... are you joking?

Go try to steal another election, leave NATO, delete the dept of education, and make another corrupt supreme court.

You people must be used to hanging around the dumbest and most gullible people on the planet.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Didn't you hear? Biden can stop the VP on Jan 6 2025.

Biden can then lock them all up.

Its not going to be close enough to question the results

 

[pknopp]

Show us where assassinating a political rival is within the President's official duties.

As noted Obama assassinated al-Awlaki and got away with it.

 

[Mr. Friscus]

Go try to steal another election,

Uh oh.

Are you questioning our democratic elections?

GASP

Are you against Democracy?????

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Its not going to be close enough to question the results

You will only question them if yoir mangod doesn't win.

That's what cultism is, after all.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Are you questioning our democratic elections?

And right into baby troll mode he goes...

yawn

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Its not going to be close enough to question the results

Doesn't matter.

Biden will have immunity. He can question the election using his official acts to ensure a great election. His discussions and action swith the AG/DOJ are covered -- now.

#lockemallup

 

[lantern2814]

As noted Obama assassinated al-Awlaki and got away with it.

He wasn't a political rival. Try again. Biden would be arrested and imprisoned for even trying to eliminate Trump.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Should I cut the poor little troll loose?

Okay.

"The overwhelming majority of the approximately 1,000 people who have been convicted of or pleaded guilty to Capitol riot-related federal crimes were not charged with obstruction and will not be affected by the outcome."

"For around 50 people who were convicted, obstruction was the only felony count, prosecutors said. " - AP

Poor troll it sucks to be you.
At oral argument Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar told the justices that prosecutors have brought charges against some 1400 defendants in connection with the riot, but that only 350 of those had been charged under the obstruction statute because of the need to prove intent to disrupt the counting of the ballots.

https://www.npr.org/2024/06/14/nx-s1-5005999/supreme-court-jan-6-prosecutions

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Doesn't matter.

Biden will have immunity. He can question the election using his official acts to ensure a great election. His discussions and action swith the AG/DOJ are covered -- now.

#lockemallup

Irrelevant the numbers going to be to high to be in question

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

some 1400 defendants in connection with the riot, but that only 350 of those had been charged under the obstruction statute

Haha, thanks for doing my light work.

I love a good assistant. .

 

[pknopp]

He wasn't a political rival. Try again. Biden would be arrested and imprisoned for even trying to eliminate Trump.

A citizen is a citizen.

 

[Mr. Friscus]

And right into baby troll mode he goes...

yawn

I'm simply referring to the fact that your leaders stupidly said that suddenly it's anti-democracy to question any US election... (after they did so in 2016).

Which standard do you hold? Are you allowed to question elections or aren't you?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I'm simply referring to the fact that your leaders stupidly said that suddenly it's anti-democracy to question any US election

Nobody is in any trouble for questioning an election.

Get this idiot strawman out of my face. It was tired and useless 3 years ago.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Speak for yourself. I had a great week.

that is because you are a fascist

 

[fncceo]

that is because you are a fascist

 

[Seymour Flops]

I didn't miss all this bedwetting while I was off the board in June.

First of all, the USSC basically kicked it back to the lower courts, stating the obvious:

That any president has some immunity for official acts. No kidding. A rookie police officer has some immunity for official acts. The cop that freaked out and killed an exterminator for pulling up his pants was granted immunity because - apparently - his training had taught him to shoot with an AR-15 an unarmed man who reaches for his pants.

Now it's up to the lower courts - who have been unanimously against Trump in previous rulings on immunity - to determine if the acts for which he is being criminally prosecuted were official or personal. Long before those cases get back to the USSC, president Trump will have pardoned himself, so they will be moot.

To address some of the bedwetting:

Trump is now above the law!

No. As stated above, many people, especially people in government, have immunity for certain offcial acts. Ironic that most of the people claiming to be offended by Trump being "above the law" are cheerleaders of bigger, more powerful, and more intrusive government.

Why, Biden could assasinate Trump and get away with it!

Of course he could, if the only drawback to assasinating Trump would be criminal prosecution. Trump assasinated that Salami guy and that Bag-Daddy guy. Why wasn't he prosecuted as soon as he left office? Because those are the kind of assasinations that go unprosecuted. If Biden assasinated Trump, and the Biden DEI appointees on the lower federal courts ruled it was an official act, then he would lose the election in a landslide and be subject to wrongful death suits that would get all of his Chinese money.

So, no. He would not "get away with it,"

Now, no president can be impeached, because impeachments are only for "high crimes and misdemeanors!"

Oy. It doesn't say that the president has to be convicted of a high crime and misdemeanor in the regular criminal system to be impeached. We've had one impeachment of Johnson, one impeachment that Nixon dodged only by resigning, one of Clinton, and I lost track of how many of Trump, and none of them at the time had been convicted of any high crime or misdemeanor.

Common sense tells us that the founders included impeachment, because they expected it to be very difficult, if not nearly impossible, to prosecute a sitting president.

The sad thing is that these IMDB liberal Democrats who are posting such melodramatic interpretations of the ruling are actually the cream of the crop. These are the guys - with some exceptions - who are at least willing to read a differing opinion, and debate people who disagree with them, rather than try to set fire to them.

 

[Faun]

No such thing as false electors it's has never been illegal when it happen in 1888 or 86 nor was it illegal when it happen in 1960.

False, as always. You don't even know what year that election was that you're trying to make a point from. It wasn't 1886 or 1888. It was 1876 and unlike 2020, only slates certified by a state are legitimate electors.

Same as in 1960. Republican electors were certified by the state until after a recount showed JFK actually won Hawaii, the governor rescinded the republican slate and certified the democratic slate.

 

[Seymour Flops]

The county has had a no good, really fucking aweful, bad week

Only your county? Which one is it?

Just kidding! I assume you meant country.

If seeing the real Biden for ninety minutes gives the country a no good really fucking awful, bad week, doesn't that mean that the country has had a no good reallly fucking awful, bad three years under Biden, even if about half of us were unaware of how bad it was, because the media has been hiding it?