Jump to content

Supreme Court rules Trump is entitled to some immunity in Jan. 6 case


Recommended Posts

35 minutes ago, thaipo7 said:

Your post is a blow against Democracy.  First, do you know the US is NOT a Democracy?  Do you have any reasoning skills?  If this did not come out this way, the the path would have been opened for the families of the 13 service members killed in the botched withdrawal from Afghanistan to individually sue the crap out of Biden.  He would have to dig into the payoffs from the Chinese, Ukrainians, Russia and probably others.  As bad as this withdrawal was, it was his decision to do it this way.  He has Immunity from being sue because of this decision.  The Supreme Court did not come up with this just for Trump.  Your posts are ridiculous when it comes to Trump.  Actually the decision should have been 9 to 0.  But we have 3 Leftist with the same mindset as you, or maybe you have the mindset of them and the Marxist media in the US who just keep repeating the same lies even when they know their stories are lies.

It helps all presidents including bush and obama.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, spidermike007 said:

I nearly on a daily basis the US Supreme Court continues to demonstrate that they are highly compromised, and that they are a pale shadow of their former selves. This current Court is likely to be considered by historians to be one of the lowest quality, and most bottom of the barrel Supreme Courts in American history. These guys are bordering on being a laughing stock and they are anything but impartial. 

So you want Bush and Obama sued for murder?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, susanlea said:

So you want Bush and Obama sued for murder?

Well I think Bush Jr. was definitely guilty of genocide, the entire Iraq campaign was just a made-up artifice, the whole WMD thing was completely fake, and he knew it, and he was responsible for killing hundreds of thousands of civilians, so yes I think perhaps charging him with mass murder would be a good idea.

 

Obama I'm not so sure about. 

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The President swears an oath to protect and defend the Constitution, against all enemies, foreign and domestic. The President has some leeway in determining what constitutes a threat. For example, it is the President who authorizes drone strikes against suspected terrorists in the tribal regions of Pakistan. The convicted felon, per the 'reasonable man' standard, engaged in Sedition against the US. The felon represents a much greater threat to the homeland than some jihadi in Quetta. The conservative Supreme Court justices have effectively obviated the Founders by making a President somewhere between a monarch and a pontiff. They are also a threat to the intent of the Founders and to US ideals.

 

Biden might as well use the ruling and have the felon and the conservative justices executed. He would be defending the Constitution and the nation as the Founders intended.

 

Immune.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, susanlea said:

War is a very messy and a very ugly thing, many mistakes are committed in the fog of war. Is every president responsible for every single strike made by the military? This is a debate that we could have that would last days if we were ever to sit down face to face. I could argue that the war in Afghanistan was infinitely more justifiable than the war in Iraq. Does that justify drone strikes that kill civilians?

 

That's a tough question to answer. I am very much anti-war, and I think that we should only get involved when the situation is truly extreme and justifiable on countless levels. 

 

I am also an advocate of passing a law that any presidential candidate not only has to have fought in a war, but has to have children of age to serve in a war, and it should be a prerequisite that his children are sent to the front lines if he or she declares a war. How's that for a deterrent? 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Walker88 said:

The President swears an oath to protect and defend the Constitution, against all enemies, foreign and domestic. The President has some leeway in determining what constitutes a threat. For example, it is the President who authorizes drone strikes against suspected terrorists in the tribal regions of Pakistan. The convicted felon, per the 'reasonable man' standard, engaged in Sedition against the US. The felon represents a much greater threat to the homeland than some jihadi in Quetta. The conservative Supreme Court justices have effectively obviated the Founders by making a President somewhere between a monarch and a pontiff. They are also a threat to the intent of the Founders and to US ideals.

 

Biden might as well use the ruling and have the felon and the conservative justices executed. He would be defending the Constitution and the nation as the Founders intended.

 

Immune.

The highest court in the land appears to not only be highly compromised and highly partial, but they also appear to be morally bankrupt. 

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, tgw said:

The title of this article is factually wrong and misleading.

 

The president's immunity is for official acts of government while in office.

 

Encouraging a mob to storm the capitol and kill the vice president isn't an act of government.

So there is no partial immunity in the Jan 6th case.

But thats not what happened. Trump did not encourage violence. 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Real Name Hidden said:


Even Tucker Carlson thought the Trump presidency was a disaster.

 

"We're all pretending we've got a lot to show for it, because admitting what a disaster it's been is too tough to digest," he wrote. "But come on. There really isn't an upside to Trump."

 

https://www.salon.com/2023/03/08/i-hate-him-passionately-new-texts-show-tucker-carlson-admit-era-was-a-disaster/

Workers got an increase in real wages. Fallen under Biden. Tucker is rich.

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, luckymitchell said:

But thats not what happened. Trump did not encourage violence. 

 

 

Out of ninety minutes of incitement, trump spoke 4/5 word phrase calling for non violence. Once the invasion of Congress was underway, didn't do anything

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

I nearly on a daily basis the US Supreme Court continues to demonstrate that they are highly compromised, and that they are a pale shadow of their former selves. This current Court is likely to be considered by historians to be one of the lowest quality, and most bottom of the barrel Supreme Courts in American history. These guys are bordering on being a laughing stock and they are anything but impartial. 

 

The vast majority of SCOTUS decisions are 9 - 0. The majority of the rest of the decisions are bipartisan. 

 

You are being fooled into believing the current court is right-wing when evidence shows otherwise. 

 

The real disgrace is the number of cases that are 9 - 0 which is a direct reflection of dysfunctional lower courts allowing stupid cases to progress. 

 

But you never thought of that, did you? 

Edited by theblether
  • Sad 1
  • Haha 1
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you ever want to know the nature of an American, watch their reaction to Chevron. 

 

True Americans believe in the rule of law. 

 

Witless Americans believe that "experts" can make things up and be allowed to drive you into bankruptcy or jail - while being unable to show what law you have broken. 

 

I'm serious - it's and brutal and clear as that. 

 

The fault lies with Congress. They need to quit grandstanding and review dozens of laws which are of genuine importance to the country's wellbeing. 

  • Thumbs Up 1
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
43 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Per the dissent, only leftist Presidents should have immunity.

Dementia Joe is protected by age and dementia. He will be dead in 2 years. Why his dodgy speech writers had him say this. It is all a sham. WH is a joke now. Mop head dodges questions and Joe can't speak for 2 minutes without help. 

 

 

Edited by susanlea
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, LosLobo said:

Biden addresses SCOTUS' decision.....
 

 

There is also uptake vid's of Biden saying he has 3 law degrees and

was head of his class and had 3 scholarships, when he was a senior.

It was all BS, and he was called out by the 3(ABC-CBS-NBC) TV Networks. Not the mockingbird MSM of today.

He has 1 law degree and was in the BOTTOM 10% of his class.

He's been lying all his political career.  

 

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, newnative said:

   Luckily, trying to overthrow the government and election tampering do not fall under official duties.

Good to know Biden can be prosecuted once he's out of office. 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...