Justice Kavanaugh asks DOJ Lawyer if Barack Obama should be prosecuted over his use of drone strikes against civilians

[wizzard426]

I hope the president is immune. Love Joe to put a hit out on Trump. And pardon himself

Let's pray you are that stupid. Let's pray we get that lucky!

 

[JohnsonLongwood]

The entire situation is illogical. Precedent establishes that the President has near total immunity and yet here we are asking if he's really immune or not. It's ridiculous.

There is no text in the Constitution that immunizes the President. Just a point for the textualists on SCOTUS. There is text giving limited immunity to Congress. If the framers intended for the President to have immunity they certainly knew how to include such language. There is no precedent because no previous President has been indicted for any crimes before, during, or after his term. Except #45. He has been sued over or indicted for crimes before, during, and after. Quite an anomaly. But we had never before elected a promiscuously corrupt business man to such a high office. Go figure!

 

[snailspace]

Yo, Johnny Shorttwig

Show me in the do called alleged constitution that abortion is a right

 

[JoePepsiCo]

Candidate Biden should be prosecuted for droning on while sniffing children' hair...

 

[JoePepsiCo]

There is no text in the Constitution that immunizes the President. Just a point for the textualists on SCOTUS. There is text giving limited immunity to Congress. If the framers intended for the President to have immunity they certainly knew how to include such language. There is no precedent because no previous President has been indicted for any crimes before, during, or after his term. Except #45. He has been sued over or indicted for crimes before, during, and after. Quite an anomaly. But we had never before elected a promiscuously corrupt business man to such a high office. Go figure!

Yes. All correct. But once we go there, which President will act with authority?

His every waking minute would be spent on doing things that would not give the other party the ability to act once they had the power. Even if innocent. It could still be a power wielded every election cycle against the incumbent.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

After reading the justice’s comments and questions about the arguments put forward by both sides, I strongly doubt the court rules that presidents have absolute immunity. A middle ground decision is the most likely scenario. The case will be remanded to the lower court for an evidentiary trial on the four charges. Don’t expect a trial this year, if ever.

 

[jomar]

After reading the justice’s comments and questions about the arguments put forward by both sides, I strongly doubt the court rules that presidents have absolute immunity. A middle ground decision is the most likely scenario. The case will be remanded to the lower court for an evidentiary trial on the four charges. Don’t expect a trial this year, if ever.

Yes, the talking heads are speculating the trump justices will protect him from a pre-election ruling.

 

[JoePepsiCo]

Remember. This came about because your progressive justice refused to step down while y'all had the White House.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

Yes, the talking heads are speculating the trump justices will protect him from a pre-election ruling.

The justices don’t give a shit about the election calendar, nor should they.

 

[jomar]

The justices don’t give a shit about the election calendar, nor should they.

Tell that to Gore and Bush the Lesser

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

Tell that to Gore and Bush the Lesser

The 2000 election case had nothing to do with the immunity question

 

[Pad_Foot]

The justices don’t give a shit about the election calendar, nor should they.

And yet they fucked in the trial schedule take an appeal for ABSOLUTE immunity and ‘rump will only face punishment for UNOFFICIAL and PERSONAL acts. No one had tried to indict any President for official acts

Fuck SCrOTUS

Blue Tidal Wave.. fix a bunch of shit !

Justices numbers to equal districts!

 

[jomar]

She stayed too long, but McConnell’s hypocrisy is a bigly reason for the current majority

 

[jomar]

The 2000 election case had nothing to do with the immunity question

Yeah well, that wasn’t the point was it

 

[ll74]

The justices don’t give a shit about the election calendar, nor should they.

Of course they are cognizant of the election calendar and the impact their decision has on the manner of things. To think they are blind to that or aren't including that in their decisions is idiotic.

 

[desecration]

One of the legs of the "Trump is an insurrectionist" argument is the speech that Trump gave on Jan 6. Those proposing this argument, including the Colorado court, claim that Trump knew or should have known that peopld would take his speech as a call to violence. Indeed, they say that Trump should not have even exercised his right to petition his government BECAUSE such people would likely be in attendance.

Now, sane people know this is a bunk argument even without citing the follow up video that was deleted from Twitter BY Twitter telling people to go home.

https://garveys-ghost.blogspot.com/2024/04/where-vox-clears-trump-of-insurrection.html

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

And yet they fucked in the trial schedule take an appeal for ABSOLUTE immunity and ‘rump will only face punishment for UNOFFICIAL and PERSONAL acts. No one had tried to indict any President for official acts

Fuck SCrOTUS

Blue Tidal Wave.. fix a bunch of shit !

Justices numbers to equal districts!

I get that you’re upset with the court for agreeing to review an unprecedented case with profound constitutional implications.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

Yeah well, that wasn’t the point was it

You’re unhappy with the Bush v Gore decision. Bummer.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

Of course they are cognizant of the election calendar and the impact their decision has on the manner of things. To think they are blind to that or aren't including that in their decisions is idiotic.

I didn’t say they’re not cognizant of the election calendar. I said they don’t give a shit about the election calendar.

 

[jomar]

You’re unhappy with the Bush v Gore decision. Bummer.

No, you missed the point again. Back to my post #60 the point being SCOTUS can move fast if it wants to, then they did but now they don’t.

 

[ll74]

I didn’t say they’re not cognizant of the election calendar. I said they don’t give a shit about the election calendar.

I think that's the perception they'd prefer for people to have. I don't think it's fully the truth

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

No, you missed the point again. Back to my post #60 the point being SCOTUS can move fast if it wants to, then they did but now they don’t.

The ruling wasn’t driven by the calendar

 

[Rightguide]

Trump was commander-in-chief for such military operations himself while he was president. That isn't anything like he is being charged with--he is being fingered for multiple--MULTIPLE--criminal acts that are separate from his duties as president. He is also being fingered for treason--for ORCHESTRATING A COUP ATTEMPT AGAINST THE UNITED STATES.

Get a clue.

He's being prosecuted for campaigning for office and for taking care that the election laws of the United States are faithfully executed.

 

[ll74]

He's being prosecuted for campaigning for office and for taking care that the election laws of the United States are faithfully executed.

Conspiring to overturn the results is what he is being prosecuted for.

None of his actions were concerned with election laws.

 

[LLCox]

I miss Jimmy Carter