BREAKING: Supreme Court rules Trump is entitled to some immunity in Jan. 6 case

[Nuthin' Fancy]

Many people sadly think many of our Constitutional guarantee's are ridiculous.

That would be some, if not most of world's countries.

We had no business being there engaging in war in the first place.

 

[Care4all]

People argue that Lincoln violated the Constitution in many ways during the war. Lincoln isn't going to get arrested and tried.

It's well documented though what the facts were concerning the Civil War. It was known that Obama had targeted Al-Awlaki. His family begged the administration for a trial. There was plenty of time for a trial. I might not even complain so much if they had found him and dropped the bomb part way through the trial.

The Obama administration targeted him but refused to provide any evidence he had done anything wrong.

Do you trust what we are told explicitly? Do you still believe we will one day find the WMD in Iraq?

What law did the administration use to kill him? International Law. We as citizens are not bound by international law where the U.S. government is concerned.

Yemen tried him in absentia but somehow we wouldn't.

We need to find and read what the Whitehouse counsel wrote in their opinion that Obama used.... I'll see if I can find it in my spare time...and when I do, I'll post it here so we can see what they claimed....and argued.

 

[pknopp]

We need to find and read what the Whitehouse counsel wrote in their opinion that Obama used....

They used International Law.

International law doesn't trump the Constitution where U.S. citizens are concerned.

I'll see if I can find it in my spare time...and when I do, I'll post it here so we can see what they claimed....and argued.

In January 2010, White House lawyers debated whether or not it was legal to kill al-Awlaki, given his U.S. citizenship.[176] U.S. officials stated that international law allows targeted killing in the event that the subject is an "imminent threat".

And noted, they said he was a risk, but refused to deliver any actual proof.

Anwar al-Awlaki - Wikipedia

 

[Rawley]

Assassinating someone labeled a terrorist or enemy combatant.

You think that's it? Biden simply calls Trump a terrorist and he can legally assassinate him. Really?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

You think that's it? Biden simply calls Trump a terrorist and he can legally assassinate him. Really?

It worked for Obama.

 

[Rawley]

There’s a goofy Congress critter from California who said Biden could send a team of commandos in to kill the conservative justices on the Supreme Court and it would not be a punishable crime.

Unhinged

 

[tahuyaman]

Unhinged

Yes, she is. That’s common with most liberals.

 

[tahuyaman]

You think that's it? Biden simply calls Trump a terrorist and he can legally assassinate him. Really?

A Rep Zoe Lofgren D from California has stated Biden can now do something like that.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

It's actually quite beautiful. And regardless of your opinion, there were no alternate or fake electors from there in 1960. The governor certified a Republican slate and then certified a Democratic slate to replace the Republican slate after a court determined JFK won. And JFK would have won the election anyway even had he lost the election. Savvy? Hawaii only had one slate to be counted by Congress.

Whereas Trump tried to flip the election he lost by getting Republicans in 7 states to send uncertified certificates of ascertainment to create conflicting slates to nullify Biden's certified certificates.

You're just a retard who doesn't know what the **** you're talking about.

Stupid just in case you didn't get the memo. Biden supporters are the most ignorant people in the world. He's done even when the media has protected him. You're an idiot for defending that cabbage. The supreme court says otherwise about Trump who was within his official capacity as president. As I've told you the j6 bullshit witch hunt is done. Trump's charges are finished. But as another thread says. Never stop your enemy from talking.

 

[Rawley]

Actually, the concept was introduced first in the Supreme court hearing using Trump as the example and ordering seal team 6 to assassinate an opponent, asking Trump's defense lawyer if that would be covered by this immunity Trump was claiming...?

Nope. It was a loon DC appellate court judge. THe court they overruled.

TO claim this opinion allows Biden to assassinate Trump is unhinged, absurd agiprop

Huh? But how would that work, with criminal activity and the No man is above the Law, concept?

Same way it's worked for centuries. You confess to hour husband that you've been banging Bob next door and killed him when he threatened to expose the affair, you confess to your priest that you were banging and killed Bob, you tell your doctor that you got Chlamydia from banging Bob, you tell your lawyer that you strangled Bob during a wild sex act. None of it is admissable

Why can't criminal doings, be used in court.

Even lawyers and clients can't use their privilege, to stop law enforcement from viewing privilege conversations or texts if criminal activity took place.....?

??? They absolutely can. And even if they find the texts, or illegally tape a privileged conversation, it cannot be used in court.

Why stop law enforcement with a president's or former president's criminal doings??

Prove it like they would any case, without the use of privileged evidence

 

[toobfreak]

The democratic party DID NOT incite the Floyd protests and DID NOT support the Rioting..

That is because there is no such thing as the "democratic party." But if you are referring to the Democrats, yes, they supported the Floyd rioting and even protected them, and in some cases, the mayor of the city even came out to support them in front of TV cameras in the street, I remember watching the live TV coverage on TV.

Biden DID NOT call for the protests or riots.

Biden was nowhere in 2020; he was off hiding in his basement the entire year.

 

[Rawley]

A Rep Zoe Lofgren D from California has stated Biden can now do something like that.

They can't face the reality that Trump is taking back the WH.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

They can't face the reality that Trump is taking back the WH.

Seems that way...and with a get out of jail free card....what could possibly go wrong.

 

[Rawley]

It worked for Obama.

Al-Awaki was not running for President against Obama.

Biden assassinating Trump is specifically what your new heroine, the wise latina proposed in her false, absurd, and unhinged hyperbole. And the nonsense you've adopted and are parroting.

 

[pknopp]

Al-Awaki was not running for President against Obama.

What difference does that make? All are supposed to be equal under the law.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Al-Awaki was not running for President against Obama.

True, but he was an American citizen, and he was executed and thanks to the SCOTUS Obama will never have to answer as to why.

Biden assassinating Trump is specifically what your new heroine, the wise latina proposed in her false, absurd, and unhinged hyperbole. And the nonsense you've adopted and are parroting.

All Biden has to do is declare him a terrorist and then killing him would be part of his official duties.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

What difference does that make? All are supposed to be equal under the law.

That is not what these folks want. It dismays me that they want their ruling class above the law, but they have proven that is indeed what they desire.

 

[tahuyaman]

Al-Awaki was not running for President against Obama….

Neither were the American citizens Obama had killed during a drone attack.

 

[Rawley]

What difference does that make? All are supposed to be equal under the law.

WHere do you get that from?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

WHere do you get that from?

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

...

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws