If You Agree That Trump Has Presidential Immunity, Then Biden has the Right to Lock Trump Up

[iku]

Lol, what a retard. Hilarious. Tell me some more retard stories there Rambo. They are entertaining.

NO

 

[evenflow1969]

NO

Aw, so disappointed. You are super entertaining. Don't be shy. Your fans await.

 

[iku]

Aw, so disappointed. You are super entertaining. Don't be shy. Your fans await.

shut up ya retard

 

[evenflow1969]

shut up ya retard

Lol, there he is more please. Good to see you have over come your shyness.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Do’h…

That’s not a real thing, dope. There’re is no absolute immunity anywhere. Not at the core, the middle or the outer. It doesn’t exist anywhere but in your hopes and dreams. It was shot down for exactly that reason.

You’re such a dope.

It’s also not what’s being sought, you deliberately dishonest shithead.


Nice babble.

Again; it’s not what’s being sought, douche.

It hasn’t been shot down yet, you utter assholle.

Tire retarded and Obtuse and dishonest.

I presented the supporting documentation, dope.

Anyone reading it can clearly see that you aren’t being truthful. Per usual.

 

[BackAgain]

I presented the supporting documentation, dope.

Anyone reading it can clearly see that you aren’t being truthful. Per usual.

No. You didn’t.

I have. Repeatedly.

Dishonest hack bitch trolls like you cannot grasp what the law already says much less what is being sought because you’re too lazy to learn. As always.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Which doesn't prove anything you've been lying about here DOPE. You're so retarded. Curse your heart and the rest of your lying sack of garbage you call a body.

I can’t help but notice that you chose to excluded the image that shows, quite clearly I might add, that I am correct.
You’re the second poster to have done so.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

No. You didn’t.

I have. Repeatedly.

Dishonest hack bitch trolls like you cannot grasp what the law already says much less what is being sought because you’re too lazy to learn. As always.

Derp…

 

[Aldo Raine]

Do it and see what happens.

Absolutely nothing except The Fat Orange Shit Giblet God/King behind bars!
MAGA

 

[BackAgain]

Hack bitch Fakey Starkey cannot intelligently discuss this topic at all

Why?

Because Fakey is too lazy, ignorant and stupid to do any research. And he wouldn’t understand any of it anyway.

But for those who give a damn about the truth, it is helpful to start with the actual law:

Nixon v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 731 (1982)

Nixon v. Fitzgerald: The President has absolute immunity from liability for civil damages arising from any official action taken while in office.

supreme.justia.com

All that the legal team for President Trump is seeking is to use the very same principals and legal bases supporting immunity from civil liability to obtain a similar outcome from criminal liability.

Their brief spells it out in fine detail but their concise statement of the “questions presented” is a useful shorthand:

Vermin like Fakey pretend to know ahead of time how the SCOTUS will rule. But the truth is that none of us yet know. Fakey bases his claim on nothing more than wishful thinking.

 

[BackAgain]

Derp…

Zzz. We know the claim was rejected below, you odious maggot.

That’s not the question. The question, you imbecile, is whether the SCOTUS will rule accordingly.

You’re the derp — once again — as always.

 

[Nostra]

I think the trump worshippers don't see how trump has shot himself in the foot like Barney Fife. His team is arguing about presidential immunity while Trump is whining about Biden prosecuting his political opposition. If the president has immunity, Biden is the president and Biden can imprison trump and eveybody associated with trump.

TODAY.

Read the full brief asking the Supreme Court to reject Trump’s presidential immunity claim​

Special counsel Jack Smith’s team urged the Supreme Court on Monday night to reject former President Donald Trump’s claim that he is immune from prosecution in a case charging him with scheming to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election.

The brief from prosecutors was submitted just over two weeks before the justices take up the legally untested question of whether an ex-president is shielded from criminal charges for official actions taken in the White House.

Read Special Prosecutor Jack Smith’s full brief to the Supreme Court here:

Hey folks, look how desperate IM2 is. Now that Biden’s weaponization of the DOJ to lock up Trump before the election is blowing up in their faces, the fascist Bidenista Cultists want Pedo Joe to lock up Trump on his own.

The panic is hilarious.

 

[IM2]

Hey folks, look how desperate IM2 is. Now that Biden’s weaponization of the DOJ to lock up Trump before the election is blowing up in their faces, the fascist Bidenista Cultists want Pedo Joe to lock up Trump on his own.

The panic is hilarious.

Nice try. But since there is no such weaponization, i'm just showing you how your belief in Trumps immunity applies to every president.

 

[Hellbilly]

He does. Yes. But it is immunity from civil liability under specific circumstances.

What specific circumstances?

 

[Nostra]

Nice try. But since there is no such weaponization, i'm just showing you how your belief in Trumps immunity applies to every president.

Your desperation is cute, Simp.

 

[jc456]

I think the trump worshippers don't see how trump has shot himself in the foot like Barney Fife. His team is arguing about presidential immunity while Trump is whining about Biden prosecuting his political opposition. If the president has immunity, Biden is the president and Biden can imprison trump and eveybody associated with trump.

TODAY.

Read the full brief asking the Supreme Court to reject Trump’s presidential immunity claim​

Special counsel Jack Smith’s team urged the Supreme Court on Monday night to reject former President Donald Trump’s claim that he is immune from prosecution in a case charging him with scheming to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election.

The brief from prosecutors was submitted just over two weeks before the justices take up the legally untested question of whether an ex-president is shielded from criminal charges for official actions taken in the White House.

Read Special Prosecutor Jack Smith’s full brief to the Supreme Court here:

how does xiden get passed the immunity exactly?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Hack bitch Fakey Starkey cannot intelligently discuss this topic at all

Why?

Because Fakey is too lazy, ignorant and stupid to do any research. And he wouldn’t understand any of it anyway.

But for those who give a damn about the truth, it is helpful to start with the actual law:

Nixon v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 731 (1982)

Nixon v. Fitzgerald: The President has absolute immunity from liability for civil damages arising from any official action taken while in office.

supreme.justia.com

All that the legal team for President Trump is seeking is to use the very same principals and legal bases supporting immunity from civil liability to obtain a similar outcome from criminal liability.

Their brief spells it out in fine detail but their concise statement of the “questions presented” is a useful shorthand:

View attachment 930173
Vermin like Fakey pretend to know ahead of time how the SCOTUS will rule. But the truth is that none of us yet know. Fakey bases his claim on nothing more than wishful thinking.

You’re such a dope.

PRIMARY HOLDING
The President has absolute immunity from liability for civil damages arising from any official action taken while in office.

Civil damages, dope. Meaning he can’t be found liable under civil law. IOW being sued.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Zzz. We know the claim was rejected below, you odious maggot.

That’s not the question. The question, you imbecile, is whether the SCOTUS will rule accordingly.

You’re the derp — once again — as always.

SCOTUS will no doubt rule accordingly and uphold.

That is the question. You said Trump never argued for absolute immunity. I showed he did and lost. Justifiably so.

 

[IM2]

Your desperation is cute, Simp.

Wrong as usual.

 

[Nostra]

Wrong as usual.

Still cute, Buttercup.