Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Fearless prediction: SCOTUS affirms presidential “immunity” in late June; cases in New York, DC, Georgia and (most of docs case) in Southern Florida undone
Free Republic | Sidebar moderator

Posted on 04/10/2024 5:20:52 AM PDT by Sidebar Moderator

“Immunity” in the sense of presidential immunity isn’t absolute. Trump’s lawyers aren’t arguing that it is. Merely that there is an orderly process delineated in the Constitution for holding the leader of the executive branch accountable: impeachment in the House, trial in the senate, conviction/removal or acquittal. All in keeping with separation of powers.

This prevents local rogue DAs (for example) from weaponizing their offices and engaging in the absurdities we’re witnessing in the Bragg and Willis circuses.


TOPICS: Chit/Chat
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-53 next last
To: Eagle Forgotten

Immune from criminal prosecution until convicted by the senate and removed from office. That’s the process the US Constitution delineates, whether we like or not. But we don’t have to conjure hypotheticals. Should Obama have been prosecuted for killing two American citizens in a military op? Should Biden be subject to prosecution for killing aid workers in Afghanistan?


21 posted on 04/10/2024 6:51:45 AM PDT by Sidebar Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Sidebar Moderator

I am not saying that I disagree with you, but suppose hypothetically that the POTUS murders his wife a week before his term ends. How can a former POTUS be impeached, convicted, and removed from office, when he is no longer in office? The crime doesn’t even have to be a homicide. What if it is learned that the now former POTUS allegedly embezzled millions of dollars from the government while in office? Are you suggesting that the constitution prevents prosecution because the alleged crimes occurred while former POTUS was still in office?


22 posted on 04/10/2024 6:53:35 AM PDT by Labyrinthos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sidebar Moderator
None of the activities described in any of the indictments even remotely rises to the level of criminality. Carrying out official duties is not a crime

I agree that Presidents should be protected from ‘official acts’ while President, and believe that is how then Supreme Court will rule, however I’m not as convinced as you that everything Trump did was either an official duty, or could not in any way be viewed as a potential crime, especially if committed by others. The audio tape of what sounds like Trump showing off classified war plans to reporters comes to mind, for starters, but he is clearly being selectively prosecuted with regard to how Hillary, Obama, and Biden have been treated, so I support his full exoneration either way. But that’s different than saying he did nothing even potentially wrong, in all these cases. I think it’s more the Democrats using lawfare to single out Trump for political purposes than him being pure as the driven snow.

23 posted on 04/10/2024 6:57:52 AM PDT by Golden Eagle (Principles, not partisanship)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Gay State Conservative

“SCOTUS will not want to be accused...yet again...of handing the Presidency to a particular candidate.”

I might tend to agree, but think that SCOTUS might well vote for immunity and do the legally correct thing here.

Why?

Biden has repeatedly ignored SCOTUS rulings, Student Loan Forgiveness: forgiving student loans when he has no congressional authorization to do so.

Repeated threats to pack SCOTUS.

Allowing the homes, families and the justices themselves to be swarmed by mobs after the Dobbs ruling in violation of law.

Shaming justices during the SOTU address.

Biden has shown nothing but contempt for the judicial branch. While voting to affirm presidential immunity is the legally correct position, it is also a massive double barreled middle finger to the eyes of Biden from SCOTUS.


24 posted on 04/10/2024 7:04:55 AM PDT by Bshaw (A nefarious deceit is upon us all!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Sidebar Moderator

The same SCOTUS that abdicated its Constitutional responsibility to hear the Texas 2020 election suit? Sure.


25 posted on 04/10/2024 7:04:58 AM PDT by william clark (A man who is unwilling to be proven wrong has little regard for truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sidebar Moderator

According to the lawfare warriors, a phone call to Georgia election officials is now a RICO violation. In New York, a dispute about business records is now a campaign finance violation. In Florida, a president keeping his presidential records after completing his term is now a violation of the Espionage Act. In DC, the case is beyond laughable. As in the abortion issue, the real Whackjob are on the left.


26 posted on 04/10/2024 7:05:48 AM PDT by Sidebar Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Eagle Forgotten
Suppose Biden ordered Seal Team 6 to assassinate Trump.

Are you suggesting that would be done as an official duty? I think not.

27 posted on 04/10/2024 7:29:07 AM PDT by BlackbirdSST (Trump or Bust! Long live the Republic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Sidebar Moderator

The question is, can any president be pursued legally for anything he did or said the moment he steps out of the white house at the end of his term?


28 posted on 04/10/2024 8:28:41 AM PDT by lurk (u)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sidebar Moderator

SCOTUS will have to go for immunity. Obama gave approval to kill a US citizen with a Hellfire missile. They’re not going to expose him legally.


29 posted on 04/10/2024 8:35:40 AM PDT by lurk (u)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eagle Forgotten
"Suppose Biden ordered Seal Team 6 to assassinate Trump."

That would be an unlawful order to murder a civilian. The Seals would not follow such an order. NSA or CIA may follow a clandestine order.

30 posted on 04/10/2024 9:31:27 AM PDT by A Navy Vet (USA Birth Certificate - 1787. Death Certificate - 2021? )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: A Navy Vet

Even if the order were carried out, a president can be impeached and removed, then tried in an Article 3 court. An impeachable offense is whatever the House deems impeachable. Trump was impeached twice on bogus charges. Didn’t matter. Impeachment is not subject to appeal. For better or for worse, the legislative’s branch impeachment and removal authority is the ultimate check and balance. No one is arguing presidents are immune, for any and all crimes. That’s a typical liberal red-herring. The Trump defense team is merely schooling the moron Obama, Clinton and Bush judges that the Constitution spells out what the process shall be to hold a lawless president accountable.


31 posted on 04/10/2024 10:27:56 AM PDT by Sidebar Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Sidebar Moderator

Fearless Prediction #2:

Even if Prediction #1 becomes True, they will still find him guilty and lock him up in late October.


32 posted on 04/10/2024 10:43:07 AM PDT by PIF (They came for me and mine ... now its your turn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sidebar Moderator

“Even if the order were carried out, a president can be impeached and removed, then tried in an Article 3 court.”

But if that were the only remedy, then a rogue president plus 34 partisan hacks in the Senate could do anything. The president could, literally, get away with murder.

There should certainly be immunity for official acts. For example, IIRC, some of Trump’s executive orders were overturned in court for having violated some statute. Even if the EO is held unlawful, Trump couldn’t be prosecuted for that.

The criminal case in New York doesn’t fall within official immunity. The alleged crime occurred partly before Trump was inaugurated. Even as to things he did as President, nothing related to Stormy Daniels was part of his official duties. His best argument is that adultery is not a crime, hush-money payments are not a crime, and the indictment concerns only a bookkeeping dispute about how the payments were treated.


33 posted on 04/10/2024 12:32:57 PM PDT by Eagle Forgotten ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Sidebar Moderator
Points taken about impeachment. The poster was talking about assassination by a Seal team. Unless their code of conduct and the USMJ has changed its laws, no Seal I've ever known would murder a civilian nor assassinate a sitting present.

When temp. stationed at Coronado years back, I got to know some BUD/S trainees and one Trident SEAL. Their standards and values were of the upmost intergrity, honor, patriotism, loyalty, dedication and respect to their superiors.

Unlike the regular army grunt, sailor, or AF mech, I highly doubt the Spec Op guys and Command have succumbed to the woke PC crap. Other than some Rangers, that's why there are no female SEALs, Army Delta, or Marine Force Recon.

For an informative article on Spec Ops units of all branches:
https://www.awg.army.mil/AWG-Contributions/AWG-Recruiting/Article-View/Article/1809184/the-most-elite-special-operations-forces-in-the-us/

Can someone please convert the URL above to a clickable link? Getting old and forget how. It covers all the Spec Op units and some you're not aware of.

34 posted on 04/10/2024 1:09:18 PM PDT by A Navy Vet (USA Birth Certificate - 1787. Death Certificate - 2021? )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: A Navy Vet

Great points! Couldn’t agree with you more. And thanks for your service, sir.


35 posted on 04/10/2024 1:18:10 PM PDT by Sidebar Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Robert DeLong

I have some hope there is enough of a majority in the Court to affirm undeniable Constitutional rights and imperatives.

Some of that hope is exhibited by it’s fairly recent 9-0 ruling against the EPA and its rules-creep and control over issues the Constitution never granted it (and this extends to other agencies in the end, IMO).

https://www.reuters.com/legal/us-supreme-court-rules-against-epa-wetlands-regulation-challenge-2023-05-25/

I also heartened by the Roe v Wade reversal, even though it was not a 9-0 decision it was by enough of a majority to not call it ‘close.’


36 posted on 04/10/2024 1:26:44 PM PDT by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

Comment #37 Removed by Moderator

To: Eagle Forgotten
But if that were the only remedy, then a rogue president plus 34 partisan hacks in the Senate could do anything. Isn’t that what we have today? Here you have a “President” who stole an election, in plain sight, clearly perpetrated a whole plethora of felonies, violated the espionage act, institutionalized FARA violations by selling his office, enabled and engaged in a series of money laundering operations and is spearheading the wholesale invasion of our country, yet he has enough partisan allies in the legislature that he can —- LITERALLY — commit any crime and get away with it scot-free
38 posted on 04/10/2024 1:36:18 PM PDT by Sidebar Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Sidebar Moderator
I would hope so.

Democrats are notorious for pushing for extremes to attack their opponents, and then reversing their positions to protect their own.

Hillary gets off scott-free, so dies Biden, but Trump gets the book thrown at him. Bill Clinton avoided all the quid-pro-quo allegations and campaign finance allegations with China, but Trump gets an expired NDA statute of limitations allegation bootstrapped into a felony. And then sometime in the future I'm sure Obama will get the white-glove treatment.

Better to nip it in the bud now and take this bit of lawfare off the table forever.

-PJ

39 posted on 04/10/2024 1:38:02 PM PDT by Political Junkie Too ( * LAAP = Left-wing Activist Agitprop Press (formerly known as the MSM))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gaffer

There’s always some hope, but I do not trust John Roberts at all, and I have little respect for Brett Kavanagh on too many of his bad rulings thus far.
<p?
John Roberts & Brett Kavanaugh have both shown disdain for Trump in support of Bush.


40 posted on 04/10/2024 1:39:08 PM PDT by Robert DeLong
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-53 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson