Lesh
Diamond Member
- Dec 21, 2016
- 82,399
- 41,251
- 2,615
Barrett, of all people, spills the beans in the immunity case.
- Thread starter berg80
- Start date
Dadoalex
Gold Member
- Jan 11, 2021
- 15,114
- 6,457
- 208
Fort Fun Indiana
Diamond Member
- Mar 10, 2017
- 110,236
- 99,369
- 3,645
Exactly right. The court never should have delayed this case by taking up the question of absolute community for official acts. And they are going to render a decision on that anyway. This is the roberts punting court.As a starting point it should be noted attorneys from both sides of the immunity case, and all the justices, agree what has been referred to as private acts, not official ones, have no claim to immunity.
At Supreme Court, Trump lawyer backs away from absolute immunity argument
Trump attorney D. John Sauer conceded there are allegations in the indictment that do not involve "official acts," meaning they would not be subject to any presidential immunity.
At Supreme Court, Trump lawyer backs away from absolute immunity argument
Trump attorney D. John Sauer conceded there are allegations in the indictment that do not involve "official acts," meaning they would not be subject to any presidential immunity.www.nbcnews.com
There's one more thing worth mentioning as a precursor. The Court should never have heard this case. Because the claim that Don has absolute immunity for criminal acts taken in office as president is an insult to reason, an assault on common sense and a perversion of the fundamental maxim of American democracy that no man is above the law. Which is how the lower courts have ruled.
With that in mind, Amy Coney Barrett's questioning of Trump's attorney, John Sauer, was game over for Don. Or at least it should have been. Here's why.
She read the individual charges from the Jan. 6 case Jack Smith has brought, asking Sauer each time whether they constituted a private act or an official one. In every instance he acknowledged they were private acts, not part of Trump's official, Article II duties as prez. That, as they say, is the ballgame. Because as Justice Jackson pointed out that is the question before the Court.
The question is decidedly not what most of the conservatives wanted to make it. An exploration of what constitutes a private and an official act. That is an intellectual exercise having nothing to do with the merits of this case since there is general agreement, even by Sauer, that the acts in question are not official in nature. Which makes the Court's willingness to hear the case yet another travesty ushered in by Trumpery.
Lesh
Diamond Member
- Dec 21, 2016
- 82,399
- 41,251
- 2,615
They are trying to delay as much as possible
Clipper
Diamond Member
- Dec 22, 2018
- 18,363
- 12,245
- 1,290
The SC has already delayed the J6 trial by at least 6 months & possibly until next year & forever if traitor Trump wins. The fix is in as the arguements had already taken place in the Appelate Court. The court decided Bush v. Gore within 24 hours so there's no excuse for what they're doing. They just adopted Trump's delay tactics as a FAVOR to him.
And all of Alito, Gorsuch & Kavanaugh's legal blather will excuse how history is going to judge those s.o.b's.
Thomas kept his mouth shut but who can blame him? His wife was in on the J6 plot. You can't make this shit up.
dudmuck
Diamond Member
Leo123
Diamond Member
- Aug 26, 2017
- 34,642
- 27,599
- 2,915
The charges were fake in the first place. This is nothing but a dog and pony show to obstruct an election.As a starting point it should be noted attorneys from both sides of the immunity case, and all the justices, agree what has been referred to as private acts, not official ones, have no claim to immunity.
At Supreme Court, Trump lawyer backs away from absolute immunity argument
Trump attorney D. John Sauer conceded there are allegations in the indictment that do not involve "official acts," meaning they would not be subject to any presidential immunity.
At Supreme Court, Trump lawyer backs away from absolute immunity argument
Trump attorney D. John Sauer conceded there are allegations in the indictment that do not involve "official acts," meaning they would not be subject to any presidential immunity.
There's one more thing worth mentioning as a precursor. The Court should never have heard this case. Because the claim that Don has absolute immunity for criminal acts taken in office as president is an insult to reason, an assault on common sense and a perversion of the fundamental maxim of American democracy that no man is above the law. Which is how the lower courts have ruled.
With that in mind, Amy Coney Barrett's questioning of Trump's attorney, John Sauer, was game over for Don. Or at least it should have been. Here's why.
She read the individual charges from the Jan. 6 case Jack Smith has brought, asking Sauer each time whether they constituted a private act or an official one. In every instance he acknowledged they were private acts, not part of Trump's official, Article II duties as prez. That, as they say, is the ballgame. Because as Justice Jackson pointed out that is the question before the Court.
The question is decidedly not what most of the conservatives wanted to make it. An exploration of what constitutes a private and an official act. That is an intellectual exercise having nothing to do with the merits of this case since there is general agreement, even by Sauer, that the acts in question are not official in nature. Which makes the Court's willingness to hear the case yet another travesty ushered in by Trumpery.
Mac1958
Diamond Member
It's beginning to just come out into the open now. It always had to, at some point. Thomas may be the worst example.
These folks have been convinced by voices they trust that they have been terribly cheated, so anything they do in response is justified. That includes ignoring every rule, breaking every trust, and manipulating every law. "Retribution" for their perceived victimhood, spread out over time. They're operating, on a day to day basis, on pure, paranoid, primitive rage.
History will also judge these craven congressional Republicans who have chosen to keep their mouths shut to save their jobs.
Last edited:
JoeB131
Diamond Member
If they were, Trump should insist on an expedited court case and argue his case in court.
He won't, because he knows he's guilty.
Clipper
Diamond Member
- Dec 22, 2018
- 18,363
- 12,245
- 1,290
Trump knows his ass is guilty & he's going to prison if he ever goes to trial. That's why he's demanding immunity & that's why his stooges on the SC are stalling that trial.
Can you imagine? Our Democracy may be in the hands of people like Barrett, Kavanaugh & Gorsuch who lied thru their teeth at their Senate confirmation hearings. And then we have Thomas who refused to recuse himself despite the fact his very own wife was in on Trump's coup attempt, which is the reason that this case is in front of that court in the first place.
You can't, I repeat, cannot make this shit up.
Is it the executive office's job to commit crimes?
SeaMajor7
Diamond Member
Similar threads
New Topics
-
-
the worst Serial Killer in History : communist and french resistanceman Marcel Petiot , nickname Doctor Satan- Started by Litwin
- Replies: 0
-
-
-
If they gave Oscars and Emmys for "Best Scene in a Movie" and "Best Scene in a Television Season."- Started by Seymour Flops
- Replies: 5
