[Kevin in California]

Hey Jagoff Smith, please elaborate on what crimes Trump committed while in office?

I don't recall Trump ever being convicted in a court of law for any crimes. Maybe I was sick that day.

[CatOwner]

The SCOTUS could end this nightmare once and for all.

[C210N]

The current Commander In Chief is immune, regardless of Jagoff Smith or SCOTUS.

[Signalman]

Hey Jagoff Smith, please elaborate on what crimes Trump committed while in office?

Correct. There were no crimes.

[Presbyterian Reporter]

“”” “This case presents a fundamental question at the heart of our democracy: whether a former President is absolutely immune from federal prosecution for crimes committed while in office,” Smith wrote”””

---

Is this a back door way to keep Trump off the ballot?

[ncfool]

I guess what they’re trying to do is to create a whole new American revolution. If the Supreme Court ruled against Trump, I think you would say game on.

[StrictConstructionist]

Jack Smith should not be a special counsel or a council of any kind since he doesn’t know what kind of government the United States has. It is not a democracy. It has never been a democracy. It is not a Democratic Republic.

The United States of America was created as and is a republic.

[Liaison]

It might be more insidious. If Trump is not libel for “crimes” during office does this get Biden off for all the congressional laws that the executive branch is ignoring during this term in office. And could the minions following orders not get prosecuted for their actions if the boss approved it.

[ryderann]

Could Biden pre-pardon Hillary, Pelosi, Obama, Jarrett, Wray, etc., etc., etc.?

[Red Badger]

According to the Constitution, only the Senate can after an Impeachment by teh House, Not the Supreme Court.................

[1Old Pro]

Exactly, what crime?

[alternatives?]

They should rule Jack doesn’t have standing.

They didn’t expedite the election cases, so why this one? Let it wind through the courts.

The NY Times says Trump’s legal team is trying to delay the case. How does the NY Times know Trump’s legal team’s strategy?

[jettester]

Sounds like: “Have you stopped beating your wife?”

As the chief law enforcement officer for the USA, he is required to investigate potential illegal activities at the Federal level. What is so hard to understand about that?

[kiryandil]

Jerk Smith wants to make the Supreme Fart go public with the final admission that BananAmerica is a third-world banana republic that invents "crimes" for former leaders who no longer have control of the coming US foreign mercenary army.

[FrankRizzo890]

And, should they take this up, AND rule in Trump’s favor, the cries of PACK THE COURT TO STOP FASCISM! will be deafening.

[Az Joe]

The Jackal

[TangoLimaSierra]

Maybe he’s looking for a way to let go of this tar baby.

[Vaduz]

The Supreme Court decides which cases it hears, so it is not required to take up the case.

Sounds like they gave him the make your move sucker we’ll decide after you charge him.

Hopefully they’ll tell him the chalk line is where you stand as we slam the door on your stinger.

[Williams]

Be framed the wisdom in a way he can’t lose. Is the president immune from any prosecution for any crimes in Office, even after he leaves Office

No court will create an immunity that broad.

But is he immune for challenging an election and asking Congress to investigate, or to select alternate electors?
And in the circumstances of this particular case.

For that he is likely immune, there might not even be a crime.

As they say in My Cousin Vinny: “It’s a bull_hit question!”

[wiseprince]

Not political at all, but we NEED THIS DATE!

[Socon-Econ]

What provision of the Constitution or statute is relevant to this dispute? I have yet to see any analysis of this in conservative media.