Renowned attorney comments on new indictment against Trump

[berg80]

As expected, You can't refute anything Turley offered so you felt compelled to lash out because your feelings were hurt.

This new emphasis on Trump’s lack of official responsibilities in relation to the electoral count is crucial for how the superseding indictment addresses the pressure on Vice President Mike Pence. Recall that Trump sought to bully Pence into leveraging his role presiding over the formal electoral count as president of the Senate to somehow swing the vote for Trump—a demand that Pence refused. The Court declared that “Trump is at least presumptively immune from prosecution for such conduct,” on the grounds that “our constitutional system anticipates that the President and Vice President will remain in close contact regarding their official duties.”

It is Smith’s obligation, the high court contends, to rebut that presumption. And in his handling of the Pence allegations, he’s signaling that he intends to do just that. Throughout the superseding indictment, nearly every reference to Pence has been augmented with a reference to his role on Jan. 6 as president of the Senate, almost like a Homeric epithet. The suggestion is that Trump’s pressure on Pence couldn’t have been related to the former’s “official duties”—especially given that Pence was playing a constitutional role in presiding over the legislative branch, over which the president has no authority. To drive this point home, the superseding indictment states, “All of the conversations between the Defendant and Vice President described below focused on the Defendant maintaining power.”

 

[berg80]

The Vice President was not taken out of the indictment as a witness because VP Pence was acting as the President of the Senate, and not as VP.....Turley failed to mention that.... that's why he is wrong.

Bingo. See post #181.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

He's not ""renowned". He's seldom right either.

Turley is renowned -- as a FOX News contributor/apologist

forkintheroad7

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I already exposed the fallacy of attack the messenger,

I didn't disagree with that. Settle down.



Let's hear the argument.

I sure couldn't find one.

 

[Nostra]

Turley is renowned -- as a FOX News contributor/apologist

forkintheroad7

What are your legal qualifications. Simp?

 

[Meathead]

Vichy Mac is jealous that he couldn't suck up to that position?

As did Kamala?

 

[struth]

Turley is renowned -- as a FOX News contributor/apologist

forkintheroad7

Correct, because he’s a world renowned legal scholor

 

[BackAgain]

I didn't disagree with that. Settle down.



Let's hear the argument.

I sure couldn't find one.

Then don’t play the game of attacking the messenger.

 

[forkintheroad7]

The Vice President was not taken out of the indictment as a witness because VP Pence was acting as the President of the Senate, and not as VP.....Turley failed to mention that.... that's why he is wrong.

that's asinine. A VP is both

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Then don’t play the game of attacking the messenger.

I didn't.

I asked you to step up and present the simple argument that should be attacked.

Not so easy, eh? Because the bad faith messenger didn't really make one.

He basically said, I'm credentialed, and here is my unargued opinion.

When the messenger refers to himself as authority, then attacking the messenger is fine.

See?

 

[BackAgain]

I didn't.

I asked you to step up and present the simple argument that should be attacked.

Not so easy, eh? Because the bad faith messenger didn't really make one.

He basically said, I'm credentialed, and here is my unargued opinion.

When the messenger refers to himself as authority, then attacking the messenger is fine.

See?

No no. You did play attack the messenger.

Get it yet?

You got called out.

Don’t cry.

Just change your petty ways.

 

[Care4all]

that's asinine. A VP is both

He is both, but the president's constitutional duties has nothing what so ever, to do with elections or their constitutional process that the President of the Senate, VP, presides over... there is nothing discussed between the president and the president of the senate (VP) that has executive privilege.

 

[struth]

He is both, but the president's constitutional duties has nothing what so ever, to do with elections or their constitutional process that the President of the Senate, VP, presides over... there is nothing discussed between the president and the president of the senate (VP) that has executive privilege.

Haha what the f are you talking about? The president is the executive branch, he has duty to enforce federal law, including federal election laws

 

[Care4all]

Haha what the f are you talking about? The president is the executive branch, he has duty to enforce federal law, including federal election laws

Sorry....when Pence acts as president of the Senate and casts a Tie vote, or performs ministerial duties for the Senate, he does this as a member of the Senate....the president of the Senate....NOT as the Executive branch duty, with Trump as overseer.

This has been argued in court already....

 

[struth]

Sorry....when Pence acts as president of the Senate and casts a Tie vote, or performs ministerial duties for the Senate, he does this as a member of the Senate....the president of the Senate....NOT as the Executive branch duty, with Trump as overseer.

This has been argued in court already....

When pence acts as president of the senate he is fullfilling his duty as VP.

Even that makes no sense because a president can speak to any member of congress and still be acting within his official duties as president.

 

[berg80]

Correct, because he’s a world renowned legal scholor

He isn't renowned for his scholarship any longer. He's renowned for his appearances on right wing media and before congressional committees as a mouthpiece for whatever it is Repubs need him to say. Even going so far as to absurdly excuse trump's call to Raffensberger as merely a request for a recount.

 

[struth]

He isn't renowned for his scholarship any longer. He's renowned for his appearances on right wing media and before congressional committees as a mouthpiece for whatever it is Repubs need him to say. Even going so far as to absurdly excuse trump's call to Raffensberger as merely a request for a recount.

Sure he is, it's just the Demafacsit have taken over his party, and they hate him for highlighting how radically, tyrantical they have become...and how they are a direct threat to our Republic and the rule of law.

I get that bothers you, but don't worry, he'd say the same thing about Hitler too

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You did play attack the messenger.

Right, I have no use for his opinions. He is a paid shill.

Arguments though... they can stand alone.

Does he have any? I didn"t see any.

 

[BackAgain]

Right, I have no use for his opinions. He is a paid shill.

Arguments though... they can stand alone.

Does he have any? I didn"t see any.

You’ll never see what you refuse to look for.

 

[struth]

Right, I have no use for his opinions. He is a paid shill.

Arguments though... they can stand alone.

Does he have any? I didn"t see any.

You didn’t? Not surprised you clearly didn’t click the link then

Not surprised, Kametoebots aren’t capable of free thinking they only listen to the propagandist