Renowned attorney comments on new indictment against Trump

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.
That's total BS

If a president has no interest in fair, legal elections... for one, he shouldn't be president.

Maybe you forgot that Trump was legitimately elected by The People?

yet you would take away his right (OUR right) to fair, legal elections, along w/ the process our system has to change things if FRAUD occurs and elections therefore are not (or possibly are not) legal and/or fair. Figures..
 
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.
So what happened in the courtroom today?
 

I just now heard of this a couple hours ago. Basically, this nut Jack Smith (who was not supposed to be bringing the original case!) re-did the old indictment after the Supreme Ct ruled that presidents have immunity from lawsuits when they are (my words) working in their capacity as a president.
Jack Smith reduced the charges (dropped about 19 of them) because of the Scotus decision and charged Trump again with 36 of the original charges that had to do with what Trump did after he was no longer president and therefore the charges now remain criminal and prosecutable. In some ways, his case is stronger now because it cannot be appealed (if found guilty) of doing them as president. He was a normal citizen.

How the Trump election subversion indictment changed after Supreme Court ruling

Department of Justice mentions were removed.
 

Forum List

Back
Top