Edgetho
Diamond Member
- Mar 27, 2012
- 22,800
- 16,004
- 2,405
- Thread starter
- #21
Correct. And the case needs to be taken to Court where the boundaries of Executive Privilege can be better defined.Your explanation has nothing to do with what was being discussed.
You're talking about executive privilege, not whether or not a criminal had the intent to break the law.
the Bastard Son of Frank Marshall Davis acted as an INDIVIDUAL when he worked to prevent the Will Of The People from being forwarded.
Nowhere in any document anywhere is that a protected action. No Executive, under any circumstances has the right to prevent The People's decision in electing a New Chief Executive from being enforced.
The Bastard broke the Law. He KNEW he was breaking the Law and he did it anyway. He was ADVISED that it was illegal and he did it anyway.
Win or Lose, The Bastard needs to be prosecuted vigorously.
We don't, or shouldn't, put Ex Presidents in prison but we can sure as Hell round up his evil minions that actually DID these thigns and lock THEM up.
Befehl ist Befehl, don't cut it.
AI Overview
"Befehl ist Befehl," meaning "an order is an order," is a defense used to justify actions taken under the command of a superior, particularly in military or hierarchical contexts. While it was historically used, particularly during the Nuremberg trials, it's not a universally accepted legal defense. It may be considered a mitigating factor, but it doesn't automatically absolve someone of responsibility for illegal or unethical actions.

