If your whole defense revolves around preventing the people involved from testifying, and claiming that you have immunity from prosecution, you're guilty AF...
Exactly but the sitting POTUS seems to have no balls or still sleeping 😴. You ain't a saint Joe. You are absolutely disappointing your supporters by being and looking like a weakling and your advisors too seems like weakling with no balls at all. C'mon Joe..at the very least do it for Bow who is called a loser and stupid sucker.
Let me ask you: does this make the supreme court guilty of Aiding and abetting in the crimes of Donald Trump? By giving aid and comfort to Trump should they be held accountable?
Trump is ineligible to hold office under the Constitution's rules about giving aid and comfort to insurrectionists. An argument could be made that this is transitive and protecting him from law enforcement is itself criminal.
It's treason plain and simple. A slow running coup still making decisions for the heritage foundation and the extreme reich wing of the republikkkan party.🇺🇸
The Democratic party needs solidarity right now. We can't lose sight on defeating drumph because Biden is too old. He didn't just become old yesterday. He was old when he defeated drumph the last time
Edit involves presidential duty while the president is the president. That is what we are talking about here. Did Trump break the law while he was doing his presidential duties?
@@katwin659 No. You can only claim presidential immunity while you are president, not a private citizen. It’s the law. Clearly, given your lack of understanding, you are not a lawyer 😎
The American people need to hear and know everything about every crime this criminal past president so we can vote with clear minds that we know everything. We the Jury need to decide.
😂😂😂😂 do you even watch any of these cases? What other jury has ever had the instructions that they don’t have to agree or name the crime in order to convict a person?! Thank God the left is so passionate about abortion, mutilating their kids genitals and anti straight people. We just gotta ride this wave out cause they’re dedicated to ending their own blood lines
Agreed - SCOTUS are blocking this in every way - allowing Trump on the ballot, granting immunity so the Jan 6 is on hold, giving Cannon a way out to dismiss the slam dunk case of illegal document retention. Cannon had already delayed it unnecessarily, and Mcafee delayed it unnecessarily by allowing a full on examination of the prosecutor.
Amy Cony Barrett (sp?) being reasonable on this issue just makes me nervous that she's buying credibility to do something much less reasonable later. Call me a cynic, but this is a woman who voted against women's fundamental rights, so she has proven her judicial flexibility..
To me, it sugests that, while she is very conservative, she is not dishonest, not easy to intimidate, and not in anybody's pocket. It could be much worse.
The funny thing is that none of Trump's appointees have been as horrible as the far right were hoping they'd be. I'm not defending them or their disastrous rulings by any stretch, but they've shown glimpses of reason and integrity that you will never see from Thomas or Alito.
She’s a maga handmaiden who voted to give tRmp the immunity afforded to Kings. They have every intention to award him the office again. She is as vile as the rest. And LIED during her appointment. She overturned precedent, and has criminally twisted the constitution to meet their political agenda.
But many of his MAGA sycophants do. But we have, I think 19 total states that have passed the law that whoever gets the overall popular vote gets the state's total electoral votes. We need about 5 more states to pass it and we are in, yea!
Shouldn’t “official acts” also be lawful? Otherwise the president would be breaking his oath of office right? How else will any president be motivated to follow the law?
If you have 34 felonies and are known as Doe 174 on Epstein's list, i will not vote for that person. Trump couldn't pass a background check for a civil service job.
Presidential immunity exists precisely for what the tyrannical Biden Administration is doing to Trump! Our forefathers saw Biden coming. So, your post is uninformed.
Porque quieren llegar al podet osi osi como trabajan los delincuente corrutos company jueses corrutos se Brendan por cada esquina y despues. Putin en estados unidos .Compensation con Democracia. Contitusion. Como se vive en Rusia Venezuela Cuba solos los corrutos delincuente viven.solo van esto bidios son persona presionales que saben los que esta en guego vota blue vota por Democracia mañana sera tarde solo pentecostal en nuetro hijo nieto vota Democrata ❤❤❤😂
This has to be one of the biggest BS rulings ever made in the MAGA Court! If Trump gets back into office, that will be the end of America! I know how I will vote, even though my vote won't count because I am from Florida! But at least I will vote!
With Scotus rulings to drop obstruction charges for Jan 6 rioters (only the very worst were charged with obstruction), ruling on Presidential Immunity, and ruling to grant kickbacks to gov't officials, this Scotus is telling us exactly who they are.
That’s not what they ruled. They said “absolute PRESUMPTION of immunity for official acts.” The lower courts still have to decide if Trump’s actions constitute an official act. He wasn’t granted immunity at all. That hasn’t even been ruled on yet. This network lies.
If Merrick Garland didn't take almost 2 years to even start working on this we wouldn't be in this position. If biden wins he needs to immediately replace merrick with someone more competent.
I'm pretty sure the language from the Supreme Court was exactly that _the lower court is to find what is and what is not official acts_ Meaning it is up to the lower court for determination, not the SC
its seems contradictive to have a president be able to somehow act officially in a way that is unconstitutional yet still falls under the perview of his official acts, like how they said he cant be pursued on the matter of trying to have Pence overturn the election results, which is a power the President does not have.
The Supreme Court has shown me no matter what is stated or said about how they should conduct themselves, their beliefs and opinions do affect their decision-making.
When Trump tried to force his security detail after his insurrection speech on Jan 6th to take him to the Capitol so he could join the violent invaders and hunt down Mike Pence and Nancy Pelosi, was he acting as a private citizen or in his official role as the president?
So...SCOTUS wants the judge to determine which criminal act Trump can be held accountable for before a jury determines if the acts were criminal. Yeah, that's not logical. This is an argument a defense lawyer should be making to a jury during a trial... Prosecutors make the case that an act is criminal and defende makes the case that it wasn't and/or there are extenuating circumstances that acknowledge the criminality but being held accountable for the act dorsnt apply to their client becaude of x/y/z. Does anyone believe the defense isnt going to make that very claim at trial? What, are they going to take an appeal of what's determined to be criminal back to SCOTUS and let's say SCOTUS allows one or two of the counts to stand and go to trial. The burden is on the prosecution to prove that trump DID what he was indicted for. So what would be the purpose of a trial at that point? I'd trust 12 people vetted for impartiality versus a very very partisan group of people that have no accountability attached to their lifetime appointments.
What about this,i grabbed this up fro. A persons comments. And ,this is what was written. Eileen Cannons husband is good friend with her husband and is a contributor to his Campaigne. He used to work Floria BasedNew York ,mobster
Judges, prosecutors, Senators, Governors, members of congress, ambassadors, police all have a measure of immunity for actions related to their work. And they vigorously defend themselves when such immunity is infringed.
yeah, and your president used to have a measure of immunity for actions related to his work. but now you have a king, 100% immune from any actions related or non-related to his work. as long as he claims its an "official act" nobody can do anything.
Wasn't Trump arguing he never took the oath for president? Or am I remembering incorrectly? Because if he did say that then nothing he did was an official act
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal. . .” constitutional amendment to make all men equal under the law WITHOUT EXCEPTION what is MORE AMERICAN????? what congress person would not vote for this?????? what state would not ratify??????
Is ACB being blackmailed or threatened in some way? I have a hard time understanding some of her decisions. I pray she will get back to the person she was when she took her oath of office 🙏🙏
The term unprecedented gets thrown around all of the time now. This is an unprecedented situation. This whole "no cameras in the courtroom" needs to be amended. The voters need to see courtroom evidence for themselves, not just what Donald is allowed to lie about after every courtroom appearance.
The Supreme court gave no direction how to determine if acts are official or not because they will eventually be the only one's to decide what is official. If they gave directions they might hamper their own later decisions.
The question becomes, who benifited or would benifit from these acts? The people? Or the individual initiating the acts. If it is the individual it is a personal act, the people an official act since he is to do the peoples work, not his own.
