Trumps "immunity" defence is punctured by the first question

[Jim H - VA USA]

Trump team argues assassination of rivals is covered by presidential immunity

Former President Trump’s legal team suggested Tuesday that even a president directing SEAL Team Six to kill a political opponent would be an action barred from prosecution given a former executive&…

thehill.com

The people that are arguing that President Biden is abusing his office because a Special Counsel has indicted his political rival, is now arguing a President can KILL his political opponent and get away with it, providing he isn't impeached for the deed or resigns if impeachment looms. Feel free to justify it.

Judge Michelle Childs, a Biden appointee, noted that a president could resign rather than face impeachment, something that under the framework of Trump’s attorneys would allow them to dodge future prosecution.

In all practicality, presidents are immune while in office....

• They can pardon themselves and others for federal crimes except for impeachment.
• They probably make the call on most assassinations. There are collateral casualties.
• The DOJ reports to the president
• Biden would have been indicted by now otherwise.

From Forbes:
The DOJ has long held that presidents cannot be criminally indicted while in office—arguing in a memo it “would impermissibly undermine the capacity of the executive branch”—and the Supreme Court ruled in Nixon v. Fitzgerald that presidents can’t be held liable in civil cases for actions they undertook as part of their official duties, though the high court separately found in Clinton v. Jones that presidents can be sued in civil court for actions taken before they were president.
[Link]

So, if they are immune while in office, how can you possibly charge them for things while they were in office? Makes no sense to me.

Whether it is a good idea or not is a different question.

Regards,
Jim

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Is the judge justifying a democrat assassination?

There ya go, special needs.
Run to momma.

 

[OKTexas]

Then I'm sorry to tell you but you do not understand the role of judges.

Actually I do, but hey, you're entitled to your opinion. They were there to address the claims of Trump's case, not a bunch of hypotheticals that had no bearing on his case.

.

 

[Zincwarrior]

Is the judge justifying a democrat assassination?

Thats your hero's argument. Biden should oblige him.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I’m not going to lie, I always thought this presidential immunity approach was pretty weak. I think it’s just a stall tactic.

You mean you ARE going to lie, and no you didn't.

"For a speech he made, and legal actions he took, acting in His official capacity as president.

So he is covered by sovereign immunity, executive privilege, freedom of speech, and right to due process. If This Were anyone but trump, and any prosecutors and judges but Obama appointees, there's no way that this case would have gotten off the ground."

BREAKING: It's Official ----Judge Chutkan Pauses Trump DC Case Amid Dispute Over Immunity Argument

Trump is claiming that he had sovereign immunity as POTUS. For a speech he made, and legal actions he took, acting in His official capacity as president. So he is covered by sovereign immunity, executive privilege, freedom of speech, and right to due process. If This Were anyone but trump, and...

www.usmessageboard.com

 

[MinTrut]

So, you see no difference between killing Bin Laden and Biden killing Trump, or Trump killing Biden?

Biden is vastly more dangerous than bin Laden was ever reputed to be, and Trump vastly less dangerous than his reputation would suggest.

So there are huge differences in terms of moral justice being served by their assassinations, both real and imagined.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

More For Fake

Uh huh. Cry it all out, son.

 

[Lakhota]

 

[Oddball]

Oh goody. So, give me the answer that his lawyers provided for that "patently absurd question?"

GFY, sap....You got fished in, just like Billy Bigmouth Bass.

 

[Lakhota]

 

[MinTrut]

GFY, sap....You got fished in, just like Billy Bigmouth Bass.

In all fairness, while the judge's question was inflammatory idiocy intended to score political points, the reply was equally poor.

PI was never intended to cover such acts.

Obviously.

 

[Missourian]

Trumps argument seems to be that anything goes unless you are impeached.
A President is immune from prosecution even after he has left office.

So, in this case……Committing a criminal act two weeks before you leave office where Congress does not have time to impeach ……leaves you immune from prosecution

Where does it say that a president can't be impeached AFTER the end of their term?

 

[g5000]

Trump team argues assassination of rivals is covered by presidential immunity

Former President Trump’s legal team suggested Tuesday that even a president directing SEAL Team Six to kill a political opponent would be an action barred from prosecution given a former executive&…

thehill.com

The people that are arguing that President Biden is abusing his office because a Special Counsel has indicted his political rival, is now arguing a President can KILL his political opponent and get away with it, providing he isn't impeached for the deed or resigns if impeachment looms. Feel free to justify it.

Judge Michelle Childs, a Biden appointee, noted that a president could resign rather than face impeachment, something that under the framework of Trump’s attorneys would allow them to dodge future prosecution.

Well, Trump called it way back in 2016. He said he could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and not lose any support.

Cult leaders recognize the weakmindedness of their followers.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Where does it say that a president can't be impeached AFTER the end of their term?

Why are you asking him? Ask the GOP frauds that insisted impeachment was worthless, since Trump was leaving office.

 

[Oddball]

In all fairness, while the judge's question was inflammatory idiocy intended to score political points, the reply was equally poor.

PI was never intended to cover such acts.

Obviously.

The answer was the only one there is: The president would need to be impeached and removed prior to the criminal trial, presuming that the chain of command would follow through on such a heinous abuse of power.

The preposterously absurd question was asked in order to elicit exactly the hair-on-fire response were getting from the shitlibs.

 

[rightwinger]

Where does it say that a president can't be impeached AFTER the end of their term?

I’ll tell ya Missouri

You need to talk to Republicans who justified not convicting Trump because he was no longer President

You need to get your story straight

 

[rightwinger]

Biden needs to send Seal Team 6 to talk to Trump
Just to talk to him “peacefully”
Now, if he resists……things happen

Ask OBL

 

[Missourian]

I’ll tell ya Missouri

You need to talk to Republicans who justified not convicting Trump because he was no longer President

You need to get your story straight

Irrelevant.

Where does it say that a president can't be impeached AFTER the end of their term?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Irrelevant.

Where does it say that a president can't be impeached AFTER the end of their term?

Make your own big boy point in your own big boy words. Why should anyone give a shit about your sealion question?

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Thats your hero's argument. Biden should oblige him.

I was thinking more along the lines of putting Biden out of our misery.

It really is only a matter of time before taking out political leaders and their followers becomes commonplace.