DC appeals court says Trump is not immune (as a former president) from prosecution

[Lastamender]

How do you know theyre punishing political opponents and not just prosecuting crimes against the people of the country?

If your head wasn't up your ass you would know they prosecute no one. Crime is rampant and they persecute Trump and associates and spy on parents and Catholics.

 

[Nobody911]

Trump not immune from prosecution in 2020 election case, federal appeals court rules

A federal appeals court ruled Tuesday that former President Trump is not immune from prosecution in the 2020 federal election case.

www.foxnews.com

Well, this was interesting, esp the part here

site

Steven Cheung, Trump campaign spokesperson, said in a statement that the case will have far-reaching consequences, both for Trump and all future presidents.

"If immunity is not granted to a President, every future President who leaves office will be immediately indicted by the opposing party," he said. "Without complete immunity, a President of the United States would not be able to properly function!"

Comment

I wonder if a former president can be held accountable for what he /she did when VICE president?

Answer?

Only if he or she is a Republican?

The US presidents have immunity from prosecution while in office, except in cases of impeachment by the House of Representatives and conviction by the Senate. After leaving office, the presidents can be prosecuted for any crimes committed while in office.

That means while in office, the US presidents can still be sued for civil matters, but they cannot be criminally prosecuted for actions taken as president. However, they can still face legal action for any personal or non-presidential related matters( such as Bill Clinton, who couldn't control his own penis ).

Now it is increasingly likely Trump will finally not enjoy himself again in WH.

 

[BS Filter]

The US presidents have immunity from prosecution while in office, except in cases of impeachment by the House of Representatives and conviction by the Senate. After leaving office, the presidents can be prosecuted for any crimes committed while in office.

That means while in office, the US presidents can still be sued for civil matters, but they cannot be criminally prosecuted for actions taken as president. However, they can still face legal action for any personal or non-presidential related matters( such as Bill Clinton, who couldn't control his own penis ).

Now it is increasingly likely Trump will finally not enjoy himself again in WH.

Oh boy, you got him this time, huh.

 

[ThisIsMe]

There has never been Presidential immunity. Why would it imperil future Presidents to acknowledge what has always been true?

Remember. Ford pardoned Nixon

If there were implied immunity that would never have happened

I’m just pointing out that the court just ruled that all presidents can be held liable for their actions while president.

This means, if I were the family of Brian Terry, I’d sue Obama and Holder for 500 million each. Since their gun running operation ended up putting the gun in the hand of the person who killed Terry.

If I were the parents of anyone who has been killed by an illegal under Biden, to sue him for tens of million each, since his refusal to secure the border allowed the illegals in to kill their family.

Both cases are examples of negligent homicide, or, their actions..or inactions, had a hand in the death of those people.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Just remember: The orange slob is the only president in history to be charged with 91 felonies. So literally nobody else is worrying about this, except his cult.

Sure, but now that it’s ruled that president is not immune to their actions while in office, people can now sue them when they get out of office, as my post above explains.

Also, Trump is only charged with 91 felonies because the republicans are too spineless to be as vindictive as the democrats. Trust me, I’m sure there are attorneys who could come up with charges for any number of things Biden, Clinton, or Obama did, it’s just the Republicans tend not to play that game like the dems do.

 

[Dekster]

Trump not immune from prosecution in 2020 election case, federal appeals court rules

A federal appeals court ruled Tuesday that former President Trump is not immune from prosecution in the 2020 federal election case.

www.foxnews.com

Well, this was interesting, esp the part here

site

Steven Cheung, Trump campaign spokesperson, said in a statement that the case will have far-reaching consequences, both for Trump and all future presidents.

"If immunity is not granted to a President, every future President who leaves office will be immediately indicted by the opposing party," he said. "Without complete immunity, a President of the United States would not be able to properly function!"

Comment

I wonder if a former president can be held accountable for what he /she did when VICE president?

Answer?

Only if he or she is a Republican?

I don't know who in their right mind would have ruled FOR Trump on this issue. It is tantamount to declaring the President Emperor. "I was President when I slaughtered Congress, so I am immune!!!" Now whether or not him giving a speech was a call for what happened is a totally different issue that the jury will have to decide.

 

[Lakhota]

How sweet it is! All women, and one black!

 

[dudmuck]

I’m just pointing out that the court just ruled that all presidents can be held liable for their actions while president.

This means, if I were the family of Brian Terry, I’d sue Obama and Holder for 500 million each. Since their gun running operation ended up putting the gun in the hand of the person who killed Terry.

If I were the parents of anyone who has been killed by an illegal under Biden, to sue him for tens of million each, since his refusal to secure the border allowed the illegals in to kill their family.

Both cases are examples of negligent homicide, or, their actions..or inactions, had a hand in the death of those people.

the 2nd amendment supporters say that guns dont kill people, its people who kill people.
Which means the responsibility for Brian Terry's murder is the person that used the gun.

Even after this immunity judgement, the president is still immune from civil liability absolutely for suits arising from actions relating to official duties.

 

[Marener]

If your head wasn't up your ass you would know they prosecute no one. Crime is rampant and they persecute Trump and associates and spy on parents and Catholics.

You know just because it's on the internet, it's not actually true, right?

 

[Marener]

I’m just pointing out that the court just ruled that all presidents can be held liable for their actions while president.

They ruled that all presidents can be criminally prosecuted for actions while president.

This means, if I were the family of Brian Terry, I’d sue Obama and Holder for 500 million each. Since their gun running operation ended up putting the gun in the hand of the person who killed Terry.

This would be a civil action and the precedent from Nixon v Fitzgerald holds that a president cannot have any civil liability for official actions taken while precedent.

But they're welcome to try because maybe the precedent of Nixon v Fitzgerald should be overturned.

 

[ThisIsMe]

the 2nd amendment supporters say that guns dont kill people, its people who kill people.
Which means the responsibility for Brian Terry's murder is the person that used the gun.

Even after this immunity judgement, the president is still immune from civil liability absolutely for suits arising from actions relating to official duties.

A gun that was put in the hands of the killer by Obama and holder.

the president is still immune from civil liability absolutely for suits arising from actions relating to official duties

Really? Isn’t this just what the court ruled? That presidents do not enjoy immunity after leaving office for actions they did while in office?

Also, negligent homicide is not a civil matter.

 

[ThisIsMe]

They ruled that all presidents can be criminally prosecuted for actions while president.

This would be a civil action and the precedent from Nixon v Fitzgerald holds that a president cannot have any civil liability for official actions taken while precedent.

But they're welcome to try because maybe the precedent of Nixon v Fitzgerald should be overturned.

if someone’s actions lead to the death of another, that is a criminal action called negligent homicide. By running guns, it allowed the cartels to get the gun that killed Terry. By not securing the border, it allowed illegals in who have killed numerous people in the country.

Both of those are actions attributable to Biden and Obama.

The dc court just said that president do not have immunity, under criminal statutes.

 

[Lastamender]

You know just because it's on the internet, it's not actually true, right?

What is not true about it?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I’m just pointing out that the court just ruled that all presidents can be held liable for their actions while president.

No. This statement is too broad.

The ruling is that this former President"s claims of immunity from federal criminal indictment in the DC case specifically dealing with his actions around Jan 6 have been rejected.

And they supported the unanimous opinion with a stream of precedence, including precedence issued from the sitting SCOTUS, if I picked that up correctly.

 

[ThisIsMe]

No. This statement is too broad.

The ruling is that this former President"s claims of immunity from federal criminal indictment in the DC case specifically dealing with his actions around Jan 6 have been rejected.

And they supported the unanimous opinion with a stream of precedence, including precedence issued from the sitting SCOTUS, if I picked that up correctly.

No, this decision was not just about THIS president. It was about all presidents in relation to criminal activities. What, are you suggesting that the DC court just made a ruling that only applies to Trump? and that all democrat presidents are still immune to prosecution for their criminal activities. That would be silly.

They stated that former presidents are not above judicial review once they are out of office.

 

[Marener]

if someone’s actions lead to the death of another, that is a criminal action called negligent homicide. By running guns, it allowed the cartels to get the gun that killed Terry. By not securing the border, it allowed illegals in who have killed numerous people in the country.

Both of those are actions attributable to Biden and Obama.

The dc court just said that president do not have immunity, under criminal statutes.

Okay, but the family of someone deceased can't sue under criminal statutes. That's a civil action.

You guys are really not that smart.

 

[Marener]

What is not true about it?

Crime is coming down. Federal prosecutors are prosecuting many cases all around the country, but most crime is under local jurisdictions.

They aren't spying on parents and Catholics.

You need to get off the internet. It's really starting to screw with your brain. I'd hate to hear about you being the next psycho that does something crazy because you believe the crazy shit from the internet.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Okay, but the family of someone deceased can't sue under criminal statutes. That's a civil action.

You guys are really not that smart.

No, an action that results in a death is not a civil action.

Where do you get that? if your actions lead to the death of another person, that is considered negligent homicide, if not actually manslaughter.

 

[Marener]

No, an action that results in a death is not a civil action.

Where do you get that? if your actions lead to the death of another person, that is considered negligent homicide, if not actually manslaughter.

Thats fine, but that’s not something you can sue over.

Thats not how lawsuits work.

 

[toobfreak]

If your head wasn't up your ass you would know they prosecute no one. Crime is rampant and they persecute Trump and associates and spy on parents and Catholics.

What is funny (odd) is that judges have immunity from prosecution. Senators and Representatives all have immunity from prosecution. Just try to sue one of them for something they said or did while in office! This has always been deemed a necessary quality for a functioning government that officials must be free and clear of legal pressure in order to operate. But suddenly, amazingly now, President Trump IS NOT immune from prosecution for merely holding a public speaking event?

Isn't this the DEFINITION of a fascist government???