ex-President Trump
I assume it's still acceptable to have a Trump thread in a Politics forum?
So this is an obvious lie - basically aimed at
9504 Replies
It actually sounds like he's suggesting not just intimidating, but actually preventing people from voting. He tells them to "stay in those voting booths", which would not allow anyone else to cast a vote in them.
Why else would you stay in the booth after you have voted?
Instead of that, he COULD have said, we have very safe and secure elections in this country and the level of fraud is almost negligible and I really lost the election. But, hey, what's a little harmless suggestion to his toothless followers.
Unbelievable!
https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/t...
« A federal appeals panel expressed deep skepticism Tuesday toward Donald Trump’s argument that he can’t be prosecuted for trying to overturn the 2020 election, raising the potentially extreme implications of absolute presidential immunity.
Trump’s lawyers argued that his federal election subversion indictment should be dismissed because he is immune from prosecution. But the three judges on the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit panel questioned whether this immunity theory championed by Trump’s lawyers would allow presidents to sell pardons or even assassinate political opponents. »
Man do trump envy Putin or what huh ?
If trump ever win this argument , I suggest biden to immediately shoot trump as being an immediate political opponents himself ….
It’s legal as being a president !
Even selling pardon !?!
Trump would ask anyone to do anything illegal he desires and then pardon them lol .
A real mob boss except with full immunity power -> What a crazy freak this guy is …
Wow you Biden folks are crazy
First you want to remove him from the ballot now you are supporting or lobbying that they kill Trump . How about just beat him at the ballot box
Did u freakn read the news ?
It’s his freakn lawyer from trump that think so …
Fack lozen , can’t u read and make some little bit of extrapolation of what that would imply by immunizing totally the president .
But maybe now u realize if it’s good for 1 president then it’s good for the other one too and what implication that could bring ???
But that would be lying.
show us the fraud
+1
Reading comprehension is more than just a series of words.
How exactly would that be lying? Which part is untrue? And please demonstrate.
Let me.
Trump said so.
This immunity defense is one of the more spectacularly dumb legal arguments I've ever seen.
There was the bad argument about uprising chaos too 😀
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’s broad immunity to criminal prosecution.
"This is great. Dump his fat orange body in the ocean..."
-Joe Biden
no no this is for the republican presidents not just any
If trump wins this appeal, Biden needs to make a phone call to the navy with a special request.
Don't like a Justice sitting on the Supreme Court? Call in seal team 6...
Trump may deliver part of closing argument in New York civil trial.
Part of me thinks that a President should have complete Immunity but you are correct if it rules that way Biden could go out and have Trump killed like you said .
I do believe the justice asked if a President could engage seal team 6 to kill his opponent and be protected and the lawyer basically said yes .
No human being should ever have complete immunity.
If it delays the proceedings long enough, it's a fine legal strategy.
Trump keeps moving the goalposts
When impeached, he says only the courts could possibly hold him accountable;
when faced with criminal charges, he says prosecution is impossible without an impeachment.
But all that really matters here is running out the clock,
bumping the trial’s March start date further and further back, until Trump is safely back in
office, able to dismiss the charges against himself and turn his immunity fantasy into reality.
LOL
Call
I was commenting on the strength of the argument, not the tactical merits of making the argument for the purpose of delay.
Which part of you believes that a president should have immunity after he leaves office for crimes he committed while in office? Why does does part of you think that this sort of immunity would be a good idea.
I do believe the justice asked if a President could engage seal team 6 to kill his opponent and be protected and the lawyer basically said yes .
The implications of this argument are stunning. You are correct that the appellate panel asked Trump's lawyer if Trump would have immunity if, during his term in office, he ordered the killing of a political rival. And the lawyer said yes, so long as he was not impeached in the House and convicted in the Senate.
Under this theory, Trump also presumably would have immunity for crimes that he committed while in office that were not discovered until after he left office (or that were discovered too late to allow for impeachment proceeding to occur while he was still in office). We all know what Trump's position is on whether impeachment proceedings are appropriate after a president leaves office. In other words, under Trump's theory of the law, on his last minute in office, he could pull out a gun and shoot the president-elect in the head on live TV without facing any criminal liability.
LOL. I agree. This is a remarkable aspect of most Trump paraphernalia.
But I feel the same way when I see the interior of one of Trump's residences. If I didn't know better, I would wonder if his interior decorators were trolling him.