Posted on 04/15/2024 6:24:50 PM PDT by Macho MAGA Man
In Addition to being prohibited from attending my son Barron’s High School Graduation, I have just learned that the highly biased Judge in the Soros “appointed” D.A. Alvin Bragg’s Witch Hunt Case, will not allow me to attend the historic PRESIDENTIAL IMMUNITY argument in front of The United States Supreme Court, on Thursday, April 25th (next week!).
(Excerpt) Read more at truthsocial.com ...
Well said.
Trump is tearing down himself and dragging you down with him.
The same devotion was shown to W. He could do no wrong. Supporters of his rivals were banned here. After 9/11 people here supported anything he proposed. FISA court expansion, tsa, Iraq war.
20 years later he’s a pariah.
I expect the same will happen with Trump, only it won’t take that long.
That's what's being debated, isn't it?
You always reflexively take whatever the "Trump is guilty" position is, so I can understand your comment.
You say he's not being charged with executive decisions, he (and many supporters) says that the President is the embodiment of the Executive Branch and everything he does is executive decisions while in that office.
It is the only branch of Constitutional government with only one person (plus a back-up) that is defined. The President IS the executive branch with plenary power given to him by the Constitution.
Trump's detractors (I'll include you in this group), are arguing to put boundaries around what a President can do that is "presidential" and what he can do that is "personal." Presidents will say that even the personal is presidential when they are holding office.
Some (like me) would argue that separation of powers prevents oner branch from defining boundaries around the other branches that are not Constitutionally authorized. For instance, Congress can define the number of Justices on the Supreme Court; the Senate must confirm the President's nominations to lower offices; the President nominates the Justices; the Chief Justice presides over impeachment trials.
Presidents will argue that the proper boundaries for Presidential immunity for executive decisions are those set by impeachment and conviction. Persecuting a President after his term expires for actions taken during his Presidency is what is being put to the test by Presidential immunity.
One charge pertains to his January 6th rally. His detractors say that attending the rally was not exercising Presidential power, so he's not immune from actions that occur from his being there. Another charge pertains to the Presidential Records Act, saying that a President doesn't have immunity from possessing classified government documents when others have said that the simple possession by the President defines what a presidential record is, and the DoJ or the Archives Librarian don't have authority to decide what is presidential or not.
What Presidents will says is that the person and the President are one and the same and they can't flip a switch and say this is presidential but that is not.
Narrowing the Presidential immunities case to only "executive decisions" is what the whole case is about. Preventing the tit-for-tat as the parties switch power is why this ruling needs to be right for future Presidents.
-PJ
thanx
someone should arrange for trump to speak to the supreme court on the 25th just get all of what’s happening into the public Zeist.
Getting a bj from an intern in a room off the Oval Office is an executive decision then. Ordering a break in of your opponent’s campaign office, executive decision.
Gotcha. Good point.
No divine right of kings in this country.
You are 100% right, Fuzz. I am surprised people here have forgotten his sordid history.
If it is not a trial date, Trump would not be required to attend at an empty court.
Immediate responses. No hounding from courtroom to courtroom post-presidency.
Adultery was still a felony in the District of Columbia until 2003. Are you suggesting that a Republican judge should have blown the dust off of the 1801 law and dragged Bill Clinton into court to prosecute him for having sexual relations with that woman, Monica Lewinski while the rest of DC was sleeping with each other?
-PJ
Or maybe just FUCK YOU!
“Closer to a monkey.”
Well that makes sense as you appear to be throwing feces all about this thread.
I was talking about the date of his son’s graduation. Does it conflict with a trial date? Are the dates already set?
These trial are out outrageous and a different scale of justice, =just wrong and many GOpers have spoken out but that does nothing.
What does? $s !
If every FReeper on here who was out raged donated $25 to the Trump campaign that would make a difference. Lefties do all the time to their man but lots of talk here and idk if we put out money where our mouth is
The point is there is no complete immunity from crimes, lawsuits etc for a president. They are covered for executive decisions only.
Clinton got Bill Richardson to take Monica Lewinsky to New York to get a job with Revlon.
Should a Republican prosecutor have had Clinton's misdemeanor sexual relations with Lewinsky bootstrapped into a felony because he used federal resources an personnel to hide Lewinsky away from the press in a New York job?
-PJ
Not tonight honey. Headache.
That's why SCOTUS is hearing it.
-PJ
Oops. Was aiming for the neighbors who play loud music. Sorry.
Adultery was a misdemeanor in DC (I said New York).
However, it is a misdemeanor in New York, too.
-PJ
Shrug. They could have tried I suppose. Probably wouldn’t have made it past the grand jury, but who knows?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.