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.
That was the opinion of the serving AG. What does that have to do with whether or not he committed the crimes he is charged with now while he was in office? You're really flailing there Soy.Where, as sitting president, He couldn't be charged until He was out of office.
Looks like smarter than you...........
Tell me where in COTUS it states that.GRANT
A Grant is a gift, to someone else.
No, not an opinion, that has been the view of DOJ for decades.That was the opinion of the serving AG. What does that have to do with whether or not he committed the crimes he is charged with now while he was in office? You're really flailing there Soy.
www.reuters.com
If he's guilty of all these crimes he would essentially be impeached. You're fighting a losing battle here.
Tell me where in COTUS it states that.
thehill.com
What does it matter that that has been the opinion of the serving AG for decades? Where is it written down in law that a President can't be charged with a crime while in office? And again, what the hell do their opinions on when a President can be charged have to do with the fact the Trump committed these crimes while in office?No, not an opinion, that has been the view of DOJ for decades.
Can a sitting U.S. president face criminal charges?
The U.S. Constitution explains how a president can be removed from office for "high crimes and misdemeanors" by Congress using the impeachment process. But the Constitution is silent on whether a president can face criminal prosecution in court, and the U.S. Supreme Court...
Was responding to this:
He would be 'essentially' impeached.
You don't seem to understand the difference between refusing to pay your taxes and paying them late.
Stop hitting yourself in the face because you're stupid, it's not going to help.You are totally wrong. Being guilty of crimes would be in a court of law. He can only be impeached for 'high crimes and misdemeanors' while in office.
Who's fighting the losing battle here?
Sometimes the penalty can be jail time.
The whole world is backing me in my position, you've only mimicking what a fool said.So now you're shit faced.
Can not backup his claims, once again..................
You cling to a failed argument that people don't go to jail for failure to pay taxes.NO. The I.R.S. very seldom put individuals in jail for failing to pay their taxes in a timely manner.
Wesley Snipes was charged with Tax Evasion. He knowingly and willingly did not pay his taxes and he went prison for doing so.
H.B. paid his back taxes. H.B. negotiated a settlement with the I.R.S to pay his back taxes and whatever fines would be imposed. He paid his back taxes.
There is a huge difference between tax evasion - Wesley Snipes and paying back taxes - H.B. AND Roger Stone.
It is you who refuse to accept that difference. You want to lock up H.B. for paying his taxes late. Which means you would have Roger Stone locked up as well, he paid is taxes late as well.
Your argument does not hold up, you refuse to admit that and move on.
You definitely have a comprehension problem.You cling to a failed argument that people don't go to jail for failure to pay taxes.
You refuse to admit your failed argument.
Dems / Socialists have some strange notions of the law..Like the MAGA here, that seems to their biggest problem. Deliberately evading paying your taxes (Wesley Snipes) and paying your taxes late (Roger Stone and H.B.).
You're not understanding some odd point you can't articulate.You definitely have a comprehension problem.
BS
Article II, Section 2, Clause 1:
The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.
The implications implicit, you dumbass. You don't need to point out an obvious contraindication in the law.Tell me where in COTUS it states that.
Show me where I said that.
Here, this may help:
Article II, Section 2, Clause 1:
The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.
What criminal escapades? You are an idiot.There's no such thing as a high profile criminal who goes around flaunting his criminal escapades. You'll be prosecuted eventually. Money and influence has only delayed the inevitable with Trump.
That is a symbolic way to protest election results. Perfectly legal. Contesting any election is legal and always will be.The Trump fake electors were covered in 2020 and they've been covered again recently.
That is a symbolic way to protest election results. Perfectly legal. Contesting any election is legal and always will be.
