Jack Smith asks Supreme Court to decide on trump immunity

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is about trying to delay. It is shocking trump is able to find attorneys to continue to humiliate themselves for enough money (assuming the checks clear)

It's shocking (not really) how MAGAs are ok with what Trump's team indirectly has said about the ability for a POTUS to assassinate a political rival.

But then, MAGA like dictators like Putin, so it's not so shocking. I bet many want Trump to have Biden assassinated.

It’s amazing that this is being argued in a court of law in the United States in 2024. I mean, we fought a revolution over not having a king. Why would Trump or anyone else try to assert that a President is above the law? Makes zero sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is about trying to delay. It is shocking trump is able to find attorneys to continue to humiliate themselves for enough money (assuming the checks clear)

It's shocking (not really) how MAGAs are ok with what Trump's team indirectly has said about the ability for a POTUS to assassinate a political rival.

But then, MAGA like dictators like Putin, so it's not so shocking. I bet many want Trump to have Biden assassinated.

It’s amazing that this is being argued in a court of law in the United States in 2024. I mean, we fought a revolution over not having a king. Why would Trump or anyone else try to assert that a President is above the law? Makes zero sense.

Be clear: This is not about "a" president. This about immunity for Trump and Trump alone. Because he's Trump. Not one single MAGAnut would tell you Biden has the same immunity or anything close to it. Just Trump. Because he's Trump.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is about trying to delay. It is shocking trump is able to find attorneys to continue to humiliate themselves for enough money (assuming the checks clear)

It's shocking (not really) how MAGAs are ok with what Trump's team indirectly has said about the ability for a POTUS to assassinate a political rival.

But then, MAGA like dictators like Putin, so it's not so shocking. I bet many want Trump to have Biden assassinated.

It’s amazing that this is being argued in a court of law in the United States in 2024. I mean, we fought a revolution over not having a king. Why would Trump or anyone else try to assert that a President is above the law? Makes zero sense.

Be clear: This is not about "a" president. This about immunity for Trump and Trump alone. Because he's Trump. Not one single MAGAnut would tell you Biden has the same immunity or anything close to it. Just Trump. Because he's Trump.

Not Trump alone. Also would apply to the next Republican president (s).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I alway wonder what would have happened if trump had been at the head of the mob on Jan 6?

No chance he’d ever do that. He’s a total coward.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is about trying to delay. It is shocking trump is able to find attorneys to continue to humiliate themselves for enough money (assuming the checks clear)

It's shocking (not really) how MAGAs are ok with what Trump's team indirectly has said about the ability for a POTUS to assassinate a political rival.

But then, MAGA like dictators like Putin, so it's not so shocking. I bet many want Trump to have Biden assassinated.

It’s amazing that this is being argued in a court of law in the United States in 2024. I mean, we fought a revolution over not having a king. Why would Trump or anyone else try to assert that a President is above the law? Makes zero sense.

Trump has taken such an extreme position that it's going to be easy for the DC Circuit to say that they aren't deciding whether there is or not presidential immunity, but whatever immunity exists it doesn't cover what trump says it does and doesn't immunize him here. And that will let scotus deny cert since it is no longer as important an issue.

[Anonymous]

There is sufficient legal precedent to overturn his arguments of immunity.

This article gives a good summary of why his arguments fail and historical precedent including precedents from the framers that show that they never intended giving an executive the type of immunity that Trump seems to feel entitled to. It's an opinion piece, but it does provide credible historical research.

https://www.idahostatesman.com/opinion/readers-opinion/article284043013.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I alway wonder what would have happened if trump had been at the head of the mob on Jan 6?

No chance he’d ever do that. He’s a total coward.

And don't forget that Trump really doesn't actually like the most MAGA of his supporters who he thinks are embarrassing in their looks and demeanor, especially on Jan. 6 when they were rabid and violent while smashing windows and doors, stealing things, and pooping in our nation's capitol building. He wouldn't have wanted to be linked to those photos of marauding hooligans since he likes to fancy himself as a class above everyone because of his wealth and connections.

I mean it's just pathetic that these down-and-out folks on the low end of the wealth, power, and glamor scale think that Trump would want anything to do with them in real life. Prove me wrong, Republicans.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is about trying to delay. It is shocking trump is able to find attorneys to continue to humiliate themselves for enough money (assuming the checks clear)

It's shocking (not really) how MAGAs are ok with what Trump's team indirectly has said about the ability for a POTUS to assassinate a political rival.

But then, MAGA like dictators like Putin, so it's not so shocking. I bet many want Trump to have Biden assassinated.

It’s amazing that this is being argued in a court of law in the United States in 2024. I mean, we fought a revolution over not having a king. Why would Trump or anyone else try to assert that a President is above the law? Makes zero sense.

Be clear: This is not about "a" president. This about immunity for Trump and Trump alone. Because he's Trump. Not one single MAGAnut would tell you Biden has the same immunity or anything close to it. Just Trump. Because he's Trump.

He's already stated he wants to prosecute Biden if he's elected. That's on the one hand. On the other he's claiming presidents have absolute immunity. So this PP is entirely accurate. He really sees this as applying only to him, even if he hasn't quite connected those dots in his head.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is about trying to delay. It is shocking trump is able to find attorneys to continue to humiliate themselves for enough money (assuming the checks clear)

It's shocking (not really) how MAGAs are ok with what Trump's team indirectly has said about the ability for a POTUS to assassinate a political rival.

But then, MAGA like dictators like Putin, so it's not so shocking. I bet many want Trump to have Biden assassinated.

It’s amazing that this is being argued in a court of law in the United States in 2024. I mean, we fought a revolution over not having a king. Why would Trump or anyone else try to assert that a President is above the law? Makes zero sense.

It makes perfect sense. Do you want democrat presidents to be hounded after office? Do you think that won't happen? Iwould do it just to drive the point home.

I think they should find something and go after Obama. Doesn't matter if it's true or not. Just use the instrumentalists of the state and a friendly prosecutor and judge to do it. Tie him up in court and bankrupt him as he tries to defend himself.

I really don't want a president who gets a 3AM call and needs to act to be asking lawyers if what he is doing would be legal and if he could be prosecuted for it later on.
Do you want every president to be looking over their shoulders constantly? That kills agility and may lead to bad outcomes in exigent circumstances.

Biden schwacked a whole family in Afghanistan - ten dead not the people they thought they were. Trial starts Feb 2025! Now what?

[Anonymous]

[twitter]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is about trying to delay. It is shocking trump is able to find attorneys to continue to humiliate themselves for enough money (assuming the checks clear)

It's shocking (not really) how MAGAs are ok with what Trump's team indirectly has said about the ability for a POTUS to assassinate a political rival.

But then, MAGA like dictators like Putin, so it's not so shocking. I bet many want Trump to have Biden assassinated.

It’s amazing that this is being argued in a court of law in the United States in 2024. I mean, we fought a revolution over not having a king. Why would Trump or anyone else try to assert that a President is above the law? Makes zero sense.

It makes perfect sense. Do you want democrat presidents to be hounded after office? Do you think that won't happen? Iwould do it just to drive the point home.

I think they should find something and go after Obama. Doesn't matter if it's true or not. Just use the instrumentalists of the state and a friendly prosecutor and judge to do it. Tie him up in court and bankrupt him as he tries to defend himself.

I really don't want a president who gets a 3AM call and needs to act to be asking lawyers if what he is doing would be legal and if he could be prosecuted for it later on.
Do you want every president to be looking over their shoulders constantly? That kills agility and may lead to bad outcomes in exigent circumstances.

Biden schwacked a whole family in Afghanistan - ten dead not the people they thought they were. Trial starts Feb 2025! Now what?

So how does “absolute immunity” fix this problem (which has never actually been a problem in the entire history of the country)? Even if a former president is immune for everything he did in office, a president who wants to bring political prosecutions could just do it on the basis of something done before or after they were in office. And if you expand it to include all that, then they could go after their family, friends, political allies etc.

[Anonymous]

I'm voting for Trump. FYA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is about trying to delay. It is shocking trump is able to find attorneys to continue to humiliate themselves for enough money (assuming the checks clear)

It's shocking (not really) how MAGAs are ok with what Trump's team indirectly has said about the ability for a POTUS to assassinate a political rival.

But then, MAGA like dictators like Putin, so it's not so shocking. I bet many want Trump to have Biden assassinated.

It’s amazing that this is being argued in a court of law in the United States in 2024. I mean, we fought a revolution over not having a king. Why would Trump or anyone else try to assert that a President is above the law? Makes zero sense.

Be clear: This is not about "a" president. This about immunity for Trump and Trump alone. Because he's Trump. Not one single MAGAnut would tell you Biden has the same immunity or anything close to it. Just Trump. Because he's Trump.

He's already stated he wants to prosecute Biden if he's elected. That's on the one hand. On the other he's claiming presidents have absolute immunity. So this PP is entirely accurate. He really sees this as applying only to him, even if he hasn't quite connected those dots in his head.

Trump has dementia and is frightened. He’s a weak old angry man.

What’s unclear is why anyone would vote for him. It’s laughable that anyone thinks he would do anything that would benefit anyone but himself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm voting for Trump. FYA.

Low information, bad judgement decision.