Trump posts all-caps rant telling people they 'JUST HAVE TO LIVE WITH' presidents who 'CROSS THE LINE'

Yahoo ^ | 01/18/2024 | Grace Eliza Goodwin

[BushCountry]

“If it was Obama”

I don’t know what is so hard to understand? It was Obama and almost president in history that broke laws. Illegally starting wars, bombing countries haphazardly, gun running, busing migrants, allowing poison to enter country, and ignoring hundreds of laws during their terms. If every president was treated as unfairly as Trump or held accountable for the laws they broke, the courts would jail every president alive now/in the future, and the courts would be tied up for decades.

[NorthMountain]

There is no constitutional authority to prosecute the president

There is no constitutional prohibition on it either. In fact, since you have read the Constitution, you're aware that it's quite vague (nearly silent, in fact) on the question of prosecuting anybody.

Also, this final paragraph in Section 3 should be of interest to you, and to Mr. Trump:

Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.

That should put an end to Mr. Trump's assertion of "COMPLETE & TOTAL PRESIDENTIAL IMMUNITY".

As I said earlier, there's no need to amend the Constitution.

[Paraclete]

Law has its limits. Even God recognizes that so he exercises grace and mercy. And the same principle applies to running a democracy. We just call grace, immunity. It seems grace is the higher calling and is needed by necessity since any law system breaks down at a certain point because of man’s imperfection. We just hope we don’t have to test it thereby pushing the system to disastrous results . . . and that is what we are well on the verge of doing.

[willk]

“White women will crawl on broken glass to vote for the Democrats on the abortion issue alone.”

Then they will deserve the hell their lives become as our country evoles into a totalitarian Marxist nightmare.

[Jim Robinson]

That is a prohibition. And he was not convicted, by the way.

[thegagline]

A PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES MUST HAVE FULL IMMUNITY

Nowhere in the Constitution does it grant the president “full immunity.” In fact, Article I, Section 3 states that those impeached are in fact subject to “ Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment ” :

“Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.”

[NorthMountain]

That is a prohibition.

That is the absolute OPPOSITE of a prohibition. The operative phrase there is, and I quote: "shall nevertheless be liable and subject to

It's as easy to understand as the clause from the Second Amendment you see in my tagline.

Bluntly: The Constitution DOES NOT provide for any sort of "COMPLETE & TOTAL PRESIDENTIAL IMMUNITY". It just isn't in there.

[ConservativeMind]

He crossed no line.

What line do you think he crossed?

[Responsibility2nd]

What line do you think he crossed?

————————————————————

The line Trump himself said he crossed.

[ConservativeMind]

Can you give the quote of what line he said he crossed?

I can’t find it.

[BlackbirdSST]

All right, another resident TDSer chimes in

Thanks for making note of that Jim.

[backpacker_c]

Another one trying to fool people....

Golden Eagle is trying to push his/her interpretaton that Trump wants full immunity, no matter what, even from impeachment, to do what ever he wants....

All right Sir, I went back and very carefully read what Trump actually said, several times, and he is saying that we should be accepting of ALL Presidents crossing the line, at their discretion,

https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/4211289/posts?page=44#44

and thegagline wants people to ignoe the part that says

“Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States:

[sauropod]

/massive eyeroll.

Another NeverTrumper spews.

[cuz1961]

you and millions of others need to get your priorities straightened out.

there is a republic to rescue and complaining about writing in caps is both infantile and asinine.

[thegagline]

You purposely omitted what came after the colon: “ but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.”

You can lie by omission or commission- you chose the former.