BluesLegend
Diamond Member
The 7-3 SCOTUS...I'm watching and laughing.
Trump's problem is that he hires lawyers for their tit size instead of their legal acumen.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The 7-3 SCOTUS...I'm watching and laughing.
Trump's problem is that he hires lawyers for their tit size instead of their legal acumen.
------------------------------------------Go ahead SCOTUS (where it's headed)....Open that box and see what happens. I triple dog dare you.
Like the power to unilaterally throw out certified votes from the state doesn't exist as part of the executive branch, complete immunity from criminal prosecution doesn't exist either. We wouldn't be a Constitutional Republic if the executive was somehow above the Constitution.Trump not immune from prosecution in 2020 election case, federal appeals court rules
A federal appeals court ruled Tuesday that former President Trump is not immune from prosecution in the 2020 federal election case.www.foxnews.com
Well, this was interesting, esp the part here
site
Steven Cheung, Trump campaign spokesperson, said in a statement that the case will have far-reaching consequences, both for Trump and all future presidents.
"If immunity is not granted to a President, every future President who leaves office will be immediately indicted by the opposing party," he said. "Without complete immunity, a President of the United States would not be able to properly function!"
Comment
I wonder if a former president can be held accountable for what he /she did when VICE president?
Answer?
Only if he or she is a Republican?
Nixon resigned just ahead of a vote to impeach that would likely have led to removal.The constitution says no such thing. In fact, presidents have always been liable to criminal prosecution after leaving office.
It's why Ford had to pardon Nixon.
He took the easy way out instead of standing up for Article II. He was a bully who took advantage of powerless women. In the end, he showed what most of us already knew: a bully is a coward by nature.It's why Clinton reached a settlement with Charles Ray on all matters related to Paula Jones perjury.
easily?Go ahead SCOTUS (where it's headed)....Open that box and see what happens. I triple dog dare you.
In fact why limit it to POTUS.....Hell the SCOTUS has caused plenty of harm over the years and could easily be indicted by folks with standing.
I was about to scroll merrily along away from this post bc I am not fond of liberals and have heard everything they have to say or think they have to say alreadyLike the power to unilaterally throw out certified votes from the state doesn't exist as part of the executive branch, complete immunity from criminal prosecution doesn't exist
There are only 9 justices! Are you using MAGAGATARD math?The 7-3 SCOTUS...
6-3, and I doubt Kavanaugh, Roberts, or Gorsuch would endorse a president who could have immunity from crimes like, oh, sending Seal Team Six to assassinate SCOTUS justices.The 7-3 SCOTUS...
You havent addressed the fact of the likelihood of the SCOTUS refusing to hear the case.The 7-3 SCOTUS...
GOOD QUESTION.So you think a President is above the law. Why?
Bad math aside, they have positions for life, so there’s no political reason for them to tarnish their legal reputations.The 7-3 SCOTUS...
I remember it well.Nixon resigned just ahead of a vote to impeach that would likely have led to removal.
If not for the pardon, Dems would have impeached after he left office, and then prosecuted. I doubt you remember, but there were meme-like cartoons of Nixon being a prison bitch, and demands that he go to jail.
Dems missed their chance when their impeachments failed miserably. The USSC will rule that way, but I hope they weight until closer to the election.
He took the easy way out instead of standing up for Article II. He was a bully who took advantage of powerless women. In the end, he showed what most of us already knew: a bully is a coward by nature.
The SCOTUS is compromised like every other government institution. How compromised is the question.I doubt that SCOTUS would ignore centuries of precedent to help Trump against decades of precedent.
Look, man, just let Trump argue that it was perfectly okay for him to unleash a mob on Congress in front off a jury.
Other than Thomas, who is dumb as a stump, I can't see ANY of them supporting a lawless president.Bad math aside, they have positions for life, so there’s no political reason for them to tarnish their legal reputations.
It's not a matter of compromising. Trump's position is absurd on its face.The SCOTUS is compromised like every other government institution. How compromised is the question.
There’s always a bad apple.Other than Thomas, who is dumb as a stump, I can't see ANY of them supporting a lawless president.