Obama Should Face Arrest

[Hel_Books]

Hel_Books said:
Claims the President who was convicted on 34 felony counts.

And re-elected by people who saw that prosecution as the purely political act that it was.

He was convicted by a jury, as many politicians have been. But go ahead, explain to us how Trump's conviction was somehow illegitimate while Hunter Biden's trial was pure.

 

[HisArpy]

I don't agree that crimes against the United States or the American people are covered by Presidential immunity.

Hiroshima did have military significance it was the Headquarters of the Japanese Second General Army, responsible for defending all of southern Japan and A major logistics and communication center. Nagasaki was a Major shipbuilding center (Mitsubishi Shipyards). The city produced military equipment, torpedoes, and arms and it was an Important industrial port. Just sayin'.

The main consideration for using the A-bomb was that an invasion of Japan wasn't going to succeed. Using the bomb solved that problem by killing the locals at the same time it wiped out the high command HQ.

I'm not one of those who say it was a crime against humanity, but there are those who do. And those who do could be bold enough to indict and charge a President after his term ends. Which acts as a chilling effect on the President's decisions while in office.

That's why immunity exists and, IMO, shouldn't have exceptions built into it. The framer's knew this and that's why they created the impeachment clause - so that Presidents would know there are limits of their power while they held the office. Opening that up to Monday Morning Quarterbacks is a freeway to disaster.

I also think that if you re-read the immunity decision you'll see that official acts are not personal acts. Obama's creation of the hoax was an official act because he couldn't benefit from it personally - he was termed out.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

Yes it is. There are no grounds for Obama to be arrested, which is the point.

However....
There are PLENTY of legal grounds for Trump to be rotting in prison right now. Treason, committed on January 6th, 2021, being only one of many. Anyone with even an inkling of understanding of the American legal system will realize this. Which is part of the reason you do not....

If only Biden had appointed a competent AG. lol.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

Good news for Obama. The nation’s leading expert on executive immunity has issued his opinion.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1948795628202397912

 

[Pad_Foot]

Let’s not forget that Trump answered a Russian spy’s questions PUBLICLY

Publicly asked for Russian help with revealing Clinton’s emails

Had Russian Spies main squeeze sugar daddy in the Oval to plan insurrection. Spy who is now Russian Legislator!

Went to WAR with an American Hero who revealed the TRUE Amerikan Spies made famous by the television series.

 

[1984X2024]

West Coast, Messed Coast™: Holy Environy! Newsom Desperately Tries to Sell Refinery He Helped Close. “Welcome to the West Coast, Messed Coast™ report, where this week the luxury-believing leftists ruling these states are beginning to realize they may have gone too far.”

 

[Lance_Castro]

View this content on Instagram

View this content on Instagram

 

[siobhancan99]

A new DOJ strike force now being assembled will determine the matter.

Trump himself says Obama has immunity btw, so ... guess you're the only one in the Trump camp that doesn't understand Trump v. US.

 

[ll74]

Trump says prosecuting Obama is difficult because of immunity.

 

[Bray123]

The White House has said that Trump's crimes that were committed before he was President still count for immunity because he became President afterwards. Or something.

So Obama is immune from all prosecutions.

 

[Rightguide]

The main consideration for using the A-bomb was that an invasion of Japan wasn't going to succeed. Using the bomb solved that problem by killing the locals at the same time it wiped out the high command HQ.

I'm not one of those who say it was a crime against humanity, but there are those who do. And those who do could be bold enough to indict and charge a President after his term ends. Which acts as a chilling effect on the President's decisions while in office.

That's why immunity exists and, IMO, shouldn't have exceptions built into it. The framer's knew this and that's why they created the impeachment clause - so that Presidents would know there are limits of their power while they held the office. Opening that up to Monday Morning Quarterbacks is a freeway to disaster.

I also think that if you re-read the immunity decision you'll see that official acts are not personal acts. Obama's creation of the hoax was an official act because he couldn't benefit from it personally - he was termed out.

the U.S. planned to invade with 1.8+ million troops in a two-stage assault. The expected cost, in American, Allied, and Japanese lives, was catastrophic. The bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were intended, in part, to avoid this massive and bloody campaign. There were two operations planned. Operation Olympic (Invasion of southern Kyushu) Planned date: November 1, 1945. Troop strength for the initial landing was 767,000 U.S. troops. The total force, including those in the follow-up waves, were 1 million. the objective was to seize airfields and establish a base for the final assault on Honshu (main island).

That was Operation Coronet (Mainland invasion of Honshu) the planned landing date was March 1, 1946. The total number of troops planned was 1.8 million American troops and possibly 100,000 British Commonwealth troops. the objective was to invade the Tokyo plain and destroy the Japanese home defense army. We had prepared offshore the largest Amphibious invasion force in history with some 3000 ships and thousands of aircraft. Those two bombs saved a lot of casualties but the eventual defeat of Japan was never in doubt. At the apex of our military power in 1945 we had 12 million men under arms. The Army alone, minus the Marine Corps, was 8.2 million men.

 

[HisArpy]

the U.S. planned to invade with 1.8+ million troops in a two-stage assault. The expected cost, in American, Allied, and Japanese lives, was catastrophic. The bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were intended, in part, to avoid this massive and bloody campaign. There were two operations planned. Operation Olympic (Invasion of southern Kyushu) Planned date: November 1, 1945. Troop strength for the initial landing was 767,000 U.S. troops. The total force, including those in the follow-up waves, were 1 million. the objective was to seize airfields and establish a base for the final assault on Honshu (main island).

That was Operation Coronet (Mainland invasion of Honshu) the planned landing date was March 1, 1946. The total number of troops planned was 1.8 million American troops and possibly 100,000 British Commonwealth troops. the objective was to invade the Tokyo plain and destroy the Japanese home defense army. We had prepared offshore the largest Amphibious invasion force in history with some 3000 ships and thousands of aircraft. Those two bombs saved a lot of casualties but the eventual defeat of Japan was never in doubt. At the apex of our military power in 1945 we had 12 million men under arms. The Army alone, minus the Marine Corps, was 8.2 million men.

In point of fact, no casualties were avoided. The loss of life was just transferred from US troops to Japanese civilians.

That however is beside the point. And that point is that if a President can be criminally charged post Presidency because of a difference in opinion or ideology or even changing societal circumstances, then there is no such thing as immunity. And that immunity has to be nearly absolute in order for a President to do his job.

Nearly absolute to the point the only thing that could pierce it would have to be something so unconscionable that it would be clear to everyone that criminal prosecution would be warranted. Something along the lines of openly assisting a foreign nation to invade the US, or similar.

Which we don't have here. What we have are sneaky machinations of election interference through misuse and abuse of government power/authority. Which, while disgusting and criminal in nature, don't affect the continued existence and fabric of the nation.

 

[Rightguide]

In point of fact, no casualties were avoided. The loss of life was just transferred from US troops to Japanese civilians.

That however is beside the point. And that point is that if a President can be criminally charged post Presidency because of a difference in opinion or ideology or even changing societal circumstances, then there is no such thing as immunity. And that immunity has to be nearly absolute in order for a President to do his job.

Nearly absolute to the point the only thing that could pierce it would have to be something so unconscionable that it would be clear to everyone that criminal prosecution would be warranted. Something along the lines of openly assisting a foreign nation to invade the US, or similar.

Which we don't have here. What we have are sneaky machinations of election interference through misuse and abuse of government power/authority. Which, while disgusting and criminal in nature, don't affect the continued existence and fabric of the nation.

Destroying cities in the 1940s wasn't considered a war crime at the time, but a necessity in the absence of technology. The CEP of conventional artillery was about 300 feet at best and for strategic aerial bombs 1200-1500 feet. British night bombing raids had CEPs measured in miles not feet. I will note as well that no German officers were prosecuted at Nuremberg for Luftwaffe bombings of civilian targets like London or Rotterdam even though these were cited as atrocities in the political record. Todays restrictions began with the 1949 Geneva Conventions, which expanded protections for civilians, but came after the war and were partly a response to what had happened.

 

[Rightguide]

In point of fact, no casualties were avoided. The loss of life was just transferred from US troops to Japanese civilians.

That however is beside the point. And that point is that if a President can be criminally charged post Presidency because of a difference in opinion or ideology or even changing societal circumstances, then there is no such thing as immunity. And that immunity has to be nearly absolute in order for a President to do his job.

How would a conspiracy against the United States, as defined in 18 USC 371, or an overt act of sedition be in harmony with a President's oath, or the constitutional admonition that "The President shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed?"

 

[Rightguide]

Trump himself says Obama has immunity btw, so ... guess you're the only one in the Trump camp that doesn't understand Trump v. US.

That doesn't mean he's technically right.

 

[siobhancan99]

That doesn't mean he's technically right.

Ah so, basically you and you alone of 8 billion people in the world understand immunity. Even your glorious god doesn't get it, but you do.

The problem with that of course is that everyone else's "misunderstanding" of immunity will prevail, since you know... every judge has the opposite understanding of you.

 

[Rotadom]

Trump Drops an Epic Truth Bomb About Obama and Russiagate​

Matt Margolis | 1:26 PM on July 22, 2025

https://media.townhall.com/cdn/hodl/2025/199/50dc86b9-1935-4e58-9267-bfc334a5e69e-1052x615.jpgAP Photo/Alex Brandon
President Donald Trump just delivered the kind of political broadside that Washington insiders will be talking about for a while. On Tuesday, cameras rolled as Trump sat in the Oval Office and publicly and unequivocally named Barack Obama as the mastermind behind the Russia collusion hoax that consumed years of the country’s time, millions of taxpayer dollars, and nearly derailed a presidency.


“Barack Hussein Obama is the ringleader. Hillary Clinton was right there with him and so was Sleepy Joe Biden, and so were the rest of them — Comey, Clapper, the whole group. They tried to rig an election, and then they got caught,” Trump declared. He didn’t stop with accusations. He delivered a demand for justice familiar to millions of Americans who watched the media and the Democratic Party gaslight the nation about “Russian collusion”: “They tried to rig the election and they got caught, and there should be very severe consequences for that.”

He summed it up in one word: “This was treason.”

President Trump’s latest comments come as new developments put the Obama administration’s fingerprints all over this disgraceful chapter of modern politics.

As PJ Media previously reported, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard recently revealed that Obama orchestrated the manipulation of intelligence to paint Trump as a Russian asset, priming the Deep State for an all-out assault on the legitimacy of his presidency.

Gabbard didn’t sugarcoat it either. “President Obama delivered the conclusion that he wanted the intelligence community to reach,” Gabbard told Sean Hannity on Fox News, “and directed them to find and essentially create and manufacture the intelligence to support the conclusion that he wanted to deliver to the American people.”

https://pjmedia.com/matt-margolis/2...rump-accuses-barack-obama-of-treason-n4941986

It's time for the DOJ to go after Obama.

This guy was your hero until he finally put Country before a felon.

John Bolton slams Tulsi Gabbard over ‘treasonous’ Obama report: ‘She’s imagined evidence that doesn’t exist’
Frequent Trump critic John Bolton described Tulsi Gabbard’s report as ‘exaggerated’

 

[HisArpy]

How would a conspiracy against the United States, as defined in 18 USC 371, or an overt act of sedition be in harmony with a President's oath, or the constitutional admonition that "The President shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed?"

You'd have to prove that the "seditious conspiracy" is an actual crime against the US outside the powers of the Presidency. That's a tough nut when you consider the full extent of Presidential power. The question becomes something along the lines of: Can the President intentionally break the law if doing so is necessary to protect the US?

The answer to that question is yes. You know it, I know it, Trump knows it.

 

[Rotadom]

You'd have to prove that the "seditious conspiracy" is an actual crime against the US outside the powers of the Presidency. That's a tough nut when you consider the full extent of Presidential power. The question becomes something along the lines of: Can the President intentionally break the law if doing so is necessary to protect the US?

The answer to that question is yes. You know it, I know it, Trump knows it.

It's "sedashious."

 

[Underrick]

MAGA people make me laugh.

 

[HisArpy]

It's "sedashious."

I thought Democrats and Progressives were only interested in salacious. I mean it's not like you don't constantly whine about flogging your dicks in public.

 

[JohnEngelman]

Pretending that Obama is a criminal is a distraction from the many ways Trump is a criminal, and the severe punishment Trump deserves.

 

[HisArpy]

Pretending that Obama is a criminal is a distraction from the many ways Trump is a criminal, and the severe punishment Trump deserves.

So you go full out deflection to avoid having to deal with the distraction?

How does that make you any different? Or even moderately intelligent?

 

[Rotadom]

I thought Democrats and Progressives were only interested in salacious. I mean it's not like you don't constantly whine about flogging your dicks in public.

You thought this made sense.

 

[JohnEngelman]

So you go full out deflection to avoid having to deal with the distraction?

How does that make you any different? Or even moderately intelligent?

What did Obama do that was illegal?