Judge Merchan Slaps Down Trump's Immunity Argument.

[Lesh]

LOL

Biden had classified documents for decades, even from back to when he was a Senator. They were also insecurely stored and transported as well.

Clinton has classified info, the court in DC said nothing could be done since Clinton claimed they were personal. And the DoJ argued that very point on behalf of Clinton.

Clinton had a diary jackass. They said it was personal because it was.

Thump had highly classified Intel and fought against returning it for over a year

 

[Lesh]

So? Not illegal. NDA's are signed every day.

NDAs have no force in illegal matters.

You sure switched your argument quickly

And yes this was illegal. Ask Cohen. He went to jail for it

 

[excalibur]

Not in this case it isn’t stupid

Derp, Trump asked for a stay pending the SCOTUS ruling.

Mercahn showed who he is by stating "insurrection" in his denial. There are no insurrection charges in DC (nor could there be as the DoJ refers to J6 as a 'riot').



Merchan further polluted the jury pool by saying this.

 

[Lesh]

Derp, Trump asked for a stay pending the SCOTUS ruling.

Mercahn showed who he is by stating "insurrection" in his denial. There are no insurrection charges in DC (nor could there be as the DoJ refers to J6 as a 'riot').



Merchan further polluted the jury pool by saying this.

Trump is asking for immunity in Presidential matters.

These are state matters that occurred before he was President

Ya dope

 

[excalibur]

Clinton had a diary jackass. They said it was personal because it was.

Thump had highly classified Intel and fought against returning it for over a year

Nope, Clinton has recordings that contain classified information.

The famous 'sock drawer tapes' case.

And neither you nor anyone else knows what Trump allegedly had. And claims them, per the PRA, as personal, same as Clinton.

Biden had classified documents from back when he was a Senator, insecurely stored, insecurely transported and did a book deal to use some of them in.

 

[Coyote]

LOL

Biden had classified documents for decades, even from back to when he was a Senator. They were also insecurely stored and transported as well.

And they were willingly returned and the FBI were given unrestricted access. Nor did he claim immunity. Try again.

Clinton has classified info, the court in DC said nothing could be done since Clinton claimed they were personal. And the DoJ argued that very point on behalf of Clinton. It

Again, some key differences. Nor did she claim immunity. Try again.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Judge Juan Merchan was heaped with praise after he slapped down former President Donald Trump's presidential immunity plea claim in his criminal hush money case.

'Sanity prevails': Hush money judge heaped with praise for tossing Trump immunity argument

Judge Juan Merchan was heaped with praise after he slapped down former President Donald Trump's presidential immunity plea claim in his criminal hush money case.Merchan's ruling Wednesday denies Trump's request to delay the New York City criminal trial until after the Supreme Court rules on the...

www.rawstory.com

Merchan's ruling Wednesday denies Trump's request to delay the New York City criminal trial until after the Supreme Court rules on the presidential immunity argument in special counsel Jack Smith's federal election interference case, a request that baffled George Conway.

"Let’s just pause for a moment to dilate on the inanity of this motion, even apart from its untimeliness," the conservative attorney wrote in response to Merchan's ruling.

So what happens if the trial moves forward but the Supreme Court rules in trumps favor? The trial would have been a waste of time and money

 

[excalibur]

Trump is asking for immunity in Presidential matters.

These are state matters that occurred before he was President

Ya dope

That is a Federal issue, not a state issue.

Thus, we have upcoming oral arguments this month in SCOTUS regarding Presidential immunity.

 

[Coyote]

LOL

Biden had classified documents for decades, even from back to when he was a Senator. They were also insecurely stored and transported as well.

Clinton has classified info, the court in DC said nothing could be done since Clinton claimed they were personal. And the DoJ argued that very point on behalf of Clinton.

Another false equivalency.

Clinton’s sock drawer case not equal to Trump documents case

As former President Donald Trump defended himself against federal charges involving classified documents, he described w

www.politifact.com

 

[Marener]

They asked for a stay pending the SCOTUS ruling in the matter.

Merchan interjected himself and showed how far over his head this is; of course he is also highly biased and is now openly using the court to protect his adult daughter, who is making money off this case.

How could Merchan interject by responding to a request made to him?

Merchan was literally required to respond. He did. Trump didn’t get what he wants because the request was idiotic.

 

[excalibur]

And they were willingly returned and the FBI were given unrestricted access. Nor did he claim immunity. Try again.

Again, some key differences. Nor did she claim immunity. Try again.

LOL

Biden had some for decades, FFS.

And no, he fought turning some over, so stop the BS. (Besides, Biden was embarrassed after Trumps indictment).

And Clinton has recordings that contain classified info that a DC court said there's nothing that can be done because Clinton claims them under the PRA as personal, and the DoJ ARGUED that on behalf of Clinton.

Reagan had voluminous diaries that contained classified info and the DoJ knew all about them (Reagan released some for a court case against someone, the name escapes me now). The DoJ did nothing about it because they were considered personal under the PRA (Reagan was the first President impacted by the PRA).

 

[excalibur]

Another false equivalency.

Clinton’s sock drawer case not equal to Trump documents case

As former President Donald Trump defended himself against federal charges involving classified documents, he described w

www.politifact.com

Nope, facts. That means it is beyond your grasp.

Bye.

 

[ThisIsMe]

View attachment 926764
His daughter raises money for democrats... the very dems that are trying to jail Trump....

Yeah, I heard about that today. She bundled money for campaigns and I think I heard that she has received money from some dems in Congress, such as Adam schiff. She also worked for the Biden-Harris campaign.

This is certainly a conflict. The daughter of the judge in the case has worked for the opposing candidate, Adam schiff, and has taken money from them.

 

[Chillicothe]

The immunity doesn’t extend to actions that are not a part of his official duties.

True that.

Not only is paying off porn queens NOT an official duty .....more importantly......it occurred well before Don Trump was in a position to have either 'official duties'.

In short, he did it as a private citizen before he became the President.
---------------------------------------------------------------

Uh, the immunity issue is already scheduled for oral argument in SCOTUS this month.

On another matter, with different facts, addressed by different laws.

And a state judge DOES NOT get to determine immunity of a President, current or former.

He does get to determine immunity of a private citizen before his court....regardless of what that defendant became after he committed the crime before that 'state judge'
Trump's "immunity" in this matter is manifestly a 'state' issue of trying a private citizen accused of a crime while he WAS a private citizen.

 

[Foxfyre]

If the courts say a president is not immune to decisions he makes as commander and chief the balance of power will shift to congress over the executive branch and over the judicial as well... The supreme court will recognize this.... this biased judge is only going for news headlines....

The issue at stake in the whole immunity thing is what constitutional authority and power the President will have. A President has to make complicated and sometimes quick decisions that have far reaching consequences. And he will make very few decisions that have 100% support from everybody. The Constitution gives the ONLY authority to discipline a President for bad decisions or actions to the U.S. Congress, i.e. the people's elected representatives.

If the Democrats are successful in being able to hold a President criminally liable for decisions he made, words he said, or whatever AFTER the person is no longer President, no President will ever be able to do his job again. No honorable person would take the job again. The malicious and self serving will continue to persecute and prosecute him/her for the rest of his/her life.

I hope and pray that the U.S. Supreme Court sees it that way and says that ONLY Congress has standing to prosecute an errant President for what he did or said while in office. ANY other decision will be the end of our Republic as we know it.

 

[Coyote]

LOL

Biden had some for decades, FFS.

And no, he fought turning some over, so stop the BS. (Besides, Biden was embarrassed after Trumps indictment).

Biden returned ALL them all and did not obstruct. Big difference. He also had a fraction of the number of documents that Trump did.

And Clinton has recordings that contain classified info that a DC court said there's nothing that can be done because Clinton claims them under the PRA as personal, and the DoJ ARGUED that on behalf of Clinton.

Already addressed that.

Reagan had voluminous diaries that contained classified info and the DoJ knew all about them (Reagan released some for a court case against someone, the name escapes me now). The DoJ did nothing about it because they were considered personal under the PRA (Reagan was the first President impacted by the PRA).

There are always arguments about what is considered personal and what is official records. It happens with every president and usually involves letters, diaries, notes. It is worked out in the courts. Never have I heard of of highly classified material concerning sensitive national security information being considered personal.

 

[Coyote]

The issue at stake in the whole immunity thing is what constitutional authority and power the President will have. A President has to make complicated and sometimes quick decisions that have far reaching consequences. And he will make very few decisions that have 100% support from everybody. The Constitution gives the ONLY authority to discipline a President for bad decisions or actions to the U.S. Congress, i.e. the people's elected representatives.

If the Democrats are successful in being able to hold a President criminally liable for decisions he made, words he said, or whatever AFTER the person is no longer President, no President will ever be able to do his job again. No honorable person would take the job again.

I hope and pray that the U.S. Supreme Court sees it that way and says that ONLY Congress has standing to prosecute an errant President for what he did or said while in office. ANY other decision will be the end of our Republic as we know it.

If a president acts outside his constitutional powers, giving him immunity would be giving him carte blanche for any criminal activity.

 

[Foxfyre]

If a president acts outside his constitutional powers, giving him immunity would be giving him carte blanche for any criminal activity.

It is the risk that we take when we elect somebody. Biden acts outside his constitutional power all the time but it is the duty of Congress to decide if his misconduct is so severe that he should be impeached and removed from office. Nobody else in the world is given authority to discipline him. The Founders were very wise to put that in the Constitution.

It is frustrating to people like me that Biden could do what he does with impunity--what he does is endangering, putting at risk, killing people--not to mention the unlawful use of taxpayer resources, but he is President. And he should not be a legal target of every person who hates him when he leaves office.

 

[Marener]

Nobody else in the world is given authority to discipline him. The Founders were very wise to put that in the Constitution.

But they didn’t put that in the constitution.

 

[Foxfyre]

But they didn’t put that in the constitution.

They gave Congress and ONLY Congress the authority to discipline a President.