[where's_the_Outrage?]

"The reason why there have not been prior criminal prosecutions is that there were not crimes," he said.

Would have liked to see a follow up question: "So directing a drone to kill a US Citizen is not considered a crime?

[ModelBreaker]

Might as well make it complete immunity. Democrats already have effective immunity. So giving all presidents complete immunity would even things up.

[kiryandil]

"The reason why there have not been prior criminal prosecutions is that there were not crimes," he said.

And there are STILL no crimes, Michael Dreeben, you lying sack of rotting dogsqueeze.

[Leep]

This is all payback for the clintoons and for not worship the halfrican.

[Leep]

This is all payback for the what what the clintoons were put throgh and for not worshiping the halfrican.

[Vaduz]

Would have liked to see a follow up question:

How long before we have to learn to speak Chinese?.

[T.B. Yoits]

No immunity for a president - no immunity for judge, including Supreme Court judges.

[Candor7]

I agree with Mark Levin. SCOTUS has no business intervening in the executive branch. The constitution allows for the impeachment of presidents who commit high crimes and misdemeanors.SCOTUS has no business deciding what immunity there is The immunity is unconditional under the Article 2 presidential powers, when a president actrs criminally, Congress can impeach a president. That's the way the Constitution is set up.SCOTUS HAS NO ROLE.

NO way that SCOTUS should even bother with the nuances on immunity the Court discussed. While POTUS is in office he has blanket immunity.PERIOD.

Or else we become a third word tin pot dictatorship.

[joesbucks]

Relaxed and tanned.