Elections Trump Indicted On 91 Counts

[Seano]

You must mean anybody then right? If this is meant to single out lefties on this forum this post is a massive fail.

I just laugh at any person posting in this forum trying to claim they don't have allegiance to one political party or the other. ITs not necessarily false what some of you "lefties" say about everyone else, its just that you try to act like its not relevant to you as well. The bald faced hypocrisy of it catches my attention, is all.

 

[BFoe]

Justice Thomas

We can only hope and pray that the other justices don’t take his arguments about the Spec Counsel seriously. Thomas is taking aim at the entire way the Office of the Spec Counsel is set up, and that affects a lot more than Jack Smith.

Hunter Biden was just found guilty on gun charges and is about to face another trial on tax charges, and according to Thomas, the Spec Counsel’s appointment would be illegal.
So David Weiss, Robert Hur, Robert Mueller, John Durham, whatever that dudes name was who investigated the Valerie Plame thing when Bush was Pres…. could you imagine how much legal havoc that would cause?

 

[AWilder]

We can only hope and pray that the other justices don’t take his arguments about the Spec Counsel seriously. Thomas is taking aim at the entire way the Office of the Spec Counsel is set up, and that affects a lot more than Jack Smith.

Hunter Biden was just found guilty on gun charges and is about to face another trial on tax charges, and according to Thomas, the Spec Counsel’s appointment would be illegal.
So David Weiss, Robert Hur, Robert Mueller, John Durham, whatever that dudes name was who investigated the Valerie Plame thing when Bush was Pres…. could you imagine how much legal havoc that would cause?

And if trump wins the odds of him getting 2 more scotus picks are pretty good. unless thomas just can't stop the gravy train.

 

[cottagecheesefan]

I'm ten pages in and there's nothing in here that's revolutionary or changing anything about the law.

Why is everyone shitting themselves?

Thanks again @BFoe for getting me that link

Yea, complete overreaction, "omg they just ruled the president can do anything!!". They clearly did not. Left wingers on twitter saying Biden can now order Seal Team 6 to take out Trump, which was basically posed by one of the DC appeals court, without any context. I had posted this at the time of the oral arguments before the Supreme court. I think I am correct in questioning judge Pan's ridiculous scenario of Seal Team 6.

Did you catch any of the MSNBC melt down last night over the SCOTUS taking up the Trump immunity case? OMG how can they even think to take up the case when the DC appeals (all democrats) had an amazing ruling and this may prevent Jack Smith from getting Trump before the election!

I dunno if you followed that ruling at all, but Judge Pak, who the MSM raved about her performance during the hearing, asked something about ordering a hit on a political opponent, can that give to presidential immunity? Well, even that depends. Does that opponent commiting treasonous, illegal action, that warrants it? But her question did not have any context like that.

Context like that is needed, because if that candidate had a dirty bomb and was about to detonate it, it would be within one's presidential duty to order that hit, wouldn't it? Thus presidential immunity

If Trump legit thought the election was stolen, which he does, then it is within his presidential duty to contest it, as allowed under the constitution, which he was, under the electoral count act, and other legal attempts.

this is one of CNN's most watched anchors. Completely unhinged and misrepresenting their ruling. Propaganda to scare people lol

 

[Fergelmince]

Roberts didn’t really say one way or the other on his ruling.


Almost none of it was constitutional, I don’t see how anyone could really argue that it was.
The Constitution prescribes no role for the POTUS in the manner that elections are run, how votes are counted or not counted, how electors are chosen or certified. I think it would be quite easy for Smith or Fanni Willis to make a case as to why these acts were not official acts.

If they *are* official acts, then we are all in real trouble. All manner of election tampering would be legitimized.

Smith’s appointment is perfectly legal, and these types of arguments have been addressed time and time again. They challenged Robert Mueller’s appointment and failed, Nixon tries to refuse subpoenas from Archibald Cox and failed…

I don’t see anything in the Spec Counsel grounds that Harland didn’t meet, or anything in the qualifications that Smith doesn’t meet, or any way that Garland misused his authority under CFR 509, 510, or 515.

Trump did nothing unconstitutional. Biden, however, has been illegally prosecuting a political opponent with an illegally appointed prosecutor because he knows he can't beat Trump at the voting booth. And Justice Thomas just sent the message to defense attorneys to get that case to the Supreme Court as well. What's funny about Smith being illegally appointed is that Judge Cannon asked him to provide examples of other prosecutors who were appointed like him, and he provided 3 names who were ALL approved by the senate.

Regardless, all these Supreme court decisions are the final decision and the law of the land. If you think they are wrong, it doesn't matter.

 

[kflo]

The court isn't saying anything new......they just affirmed that you indeed cannot prosecute a president in criminal court for actions that fall within their constitutional powers. Which means 99% of the stuff they are trying to prosecute Trump for can no longer go forward.

cope and seethe

how are election interference or document stealing as former president within his constitutional powers?

 

[sickc0d3r]

I'm ten pages in and there's nothing in here that's revolutionary or changing anything about the law.

Why is everyone shitting themselves?

Thanks again @BFoe for getting me that link

I think regular folks like us don’t have the legal chops to see all of the ramifications, but there are troubling things in the decision. For example, “the Executive Branch has ‘exclusive authority and absolute discretion’ to decide which crimes to investigate and prosecute”. And “in dividing official from unofficial conduct, courts may not inquire into the President’s motives.”

Isn’t this exactly what maga folks have been alleging of Biden, calling it a “weaponized” doj?

Anyway, I’d say read the dissents and wait for some more legal analysis to come out before settling on the opinion that this changes nothing.

 

[sickc0d3r]

Biden, however, has been illegally prosecuting a political opponent with an illegally appointed prosecutor because he knows he can't beat Trump at the voting booth.

None of this can possibly be true, and his motivations cannot even be considered, according to today’s ruling.

 

[Fergelmince]

None of this can possibly be true, and his motivations cannot even be considered, according to today’s ruling.

Not unless congress finds documentation of Biden admitting to prosecuting Trump for those purposes. It could be in Hur's interview, which is why Garland is acting in contempt of congress by withholding Hur's recordings. However, Jack Smith is illegally appointed, that has nothing to do with motivation, and a Supreme Court judge is on record recognizing this and inviting the illegality of this appointment to be heard by his court.

 

[CantCucktheTuck]

None of this can possibly be true, and his motivations cannot even be considered, according to today’s ruling.

It can defiantly be confirmed whether or not the special prosecutor was appointed illegally.

 

[rearnakedchoke]

Not sure I see this as that crazy a decision. It says “official” duties. The courts just have to prove acts were not official.

 

[KOPPE]

Trump did nothing unconstitutional.

- Asked VP Pence to put him over the Constitution.
- Incited the threat and use of violent force as his last opportunity to stop the peaceful transfer of executive power.
- Wanted to shoot black protesters in the streets, but the white ones that stormed the capital he calls innocent "hostages".
- Called America's number 1 enemy 'genius' and 'savvy' for Ukraine invasion.
- Received at least $7.8 million from 20 foreign governments during his presidency
- Took in more than $160 million from international sources during his presidency.
- Violated the constitutional authority given only to Congress to appropriate federal spending by stealing funds from the military to try to build his border wall.
- Expressed a deep opposition to birthright citizenship. Declared that he would abolish birthright citizenship with an executive order. Your favorite rapist was then informed that such an order would never stand up legally.
- Called for the death penalty for five young Black and brown men before they even had a trial
- demanded a “total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the U.S

 

[DoctorTaco]

until he retracted his damn tentacles.

Legit lol’d

 

[DoctorTaco]

- Asked VP Pence to put him over the Constitution.
- Incited the threat and use of violent force as his last opportunity to stop the peaceful transfer of executive power.
- Wanted to shoot black protesters in the streets, but the white ones that stormed the capital he calls innocent "hostages".
- Called America's number 1 enemy 'genius' and 'savvy' for Ukraine invasion.
- Received at least $7.8 million from 20 foreign governments during his presidency
- Took in more than $160 million from international sources during his presidency.
- Violated the constitutional authority given only to Congress to appropriate federal spending by stealing funds from the military to try to build his border wall.
- Expressed a deep opposition to birthright citizenship. Declared that he would abolish birthright citizenship with an executive order. Your favorite rapist was then informed that such an order would never stand up legally.
- Called for the death penalty for five young Black and brown men before they even had a trial
- demanded a “total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the U.S

Also fleeced the American people by charging an exorbitant amount of money for secret service to stay at his hotels

 

[LangfordBarrow]

I just laugh at any person posting in this forum trying to claim they don't have allegiance to one political party or the other. ITs not necessarily false what some of you "lefties" say about everyone else, its just that you try to act like its not relevant to you as well. The bald faced hypocrisy of it catches my attention, is all.

It seems to me you fall into this same category. I don't think everyone here is a partisan hack but I do agree there are some on both sides here that would never speak against their party.

 

[syct23]

The court isn't saying anything new......they just affirmed that you indeed cannot prosecute a president in criminal court for actions that fall within their constitutional powers. Which means 99% of the stuff they are trying to prosecute Trump for can no longer go forward.

cope and seethe

I guess that’s good for trump,

But trump is not president at the moment. Trump would need to win the presidency again in order to beginning using these newly discovered rules of presidential power, it would still be another six more months.

Biden however is currently acting president, these new rules are at his disposal now, not in six months.

trump asking the question for the court to rule on, has now opened the door for Biden to act on, before trump has a chance to..

 

[Andy Capp]

Legit lol’d

I didn't find the story at all amusing, honestly.

 

[CantCucktheTuck]

I guess that’s good for trump,

But trump is not president at the moment. Trump would need to win the presidency again in order to beginning using these newly discovered rules of presidential power, it would still be another six more months.

Biden however is currently acting president, these new rules are at his disposal now, not in six months.

trump asking the question for the court to rule on, has now opened the door for Biden to act on, before trump has a chance to..

that's my point though.... there are no new powers. The only thing new here is trying to criminally prosecute a president for acts that fall within their constitutional powers.

 

[Andy Capp]

Jack Smith's days are NUMBERED

Good luck with that.

 

[Err]

Not sure I see this as that crazy a decision. It says “official” duties. The courts just have to prove acts were not official.

Trump will have died of old age before the courts rule on what constitutes official duties.