Special Counsel Asks Supreme Court To Rule Quickly Whether Trump Can Be Prosecuted

[Marener]

Then what do YOU think Trump's case is?

Trump is claiming he can’t be subject to prosecution because of a stupid interpretation of the impeachment clause. He’s saying the president cant be prosecuted until he’s impeached (which is true), but fails to mention that he isn’t president.

 

[dudmuck]

Then you believe that Obama should be in prison for murdering US civilians? How about for drone striking a wedding?

why not the drone pilot that was driving the drone?

 

[Godboy]

Ridiculous, ignorant, hyperbolic nonsense.

No grand jury would indict President Obama for murder because there would be no evidence of a crime; Federal prosecutors can’t indict someone absent evidence just because they want to.

Trump was indicted because there was ample, compelling, objective, documented evidence of his crimes.

No one is above the law, including presidents.

No evidence of the crime?!!! Are you retarded? Every drone strike is recorded and documented. No one is even denying Obama did it, not even Obama himself.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Dude, every single president would come out of the office under numerous indictments. What do you suppose that would do to future presidents? Are they all going to be awesome after that? No!!! They will all be paralyzed with fear and bad guys around the world will greatly prosper as a result.

seems better than having some god above the laws of their very own country sitting in the White House

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I can’t imagine the court would accept Trump’s claim that nothing he does while president could ever be subject to criminal prosecution.

Given the Supreme Court is dominated by partisan conservative ideologues, it’s perfectly understandable to imagine the Court doing just that.

 

[Godboy]

Trump is claiming he can’t be subject to prosecution because of a stupid interpretation of the impeachment clause. He’s saying the president cant be prosecuted until he’s impeached (which is true), but fails to mention that he isn’t president.

He was president at the time when they are saying he did sonething illegal.

 

[jbrownson0831]

Ridiculous, ignorant, hyperbolic nonsense.

No grand jury would indict President Obama for murder because there would be no evidence of a crime; Federal prosecutors can’t indict someone absent evidence just because they want to.

Trump was indicted because there was ample, compelling, objective, documented evidence of his crimes.

No one is above the law, including presidents.

More baloney from the Mrs. Jones libtard sausage factory.....
WHat a kook you are Mrs. Jones.....

 

[Godboy]

Incite an attack on the US Capitol.

He didnt do that. Thats why he hasnt been charged with "incitement".

 

[Godboy]

seems better than having some god above the laws of their very own country sitting in the White House

No the **** isnt better. Thats an absurd and naive statement.

 

[Marener]

He was president at the time when they are saying he did sonething illegal.

So what?

 

[jbrownson0831]

Given the Supreme Court is dominated by partisan conservative ideologues, it’s perfectly understandable to imagine the Court doing just that.

Conservatives judge by actual law, no wonder you are whining so much Mrs. Jones.....

 

[Moonglow]

Tha **** kind of answer is that?

One you can't understand. From time to time some cases test the law and standing of the Constitution through the interpretation of the Constitution.

 

[Godboy]

why not the drone pilot that was driving the drone?

He was under the orders of the Commander in Chief.

 

[postman]

Absolutely not. You can dely electoral results under a court order. Any suggestion otherwise is pure horseshit.

Not for President and Vice President.
The constitution gives a clear deadlines as does federal law for a president to be decided. Either by the EC or by Congress. A delay in the first, automatically triggers action in the other.

 

[Godboy]

One you can't understand. From time to time some cases test the law and standing of the Constitution through the interpretation of the Constitution.

Pay attention to the discussion before jumping in with random useless posts that dont apply to the conversation.

 

[Marener]

He was under the orders of the Commander in Chief.

When did they make war illegal?

Youve got some bizarre beliefs about how government should work.

 

[Godboy]

Not for President and Vice President.
The constitution gives a clear deadlines as does federal law for a president to be decided. Either by the EC or by Congress. A delay in the first, automatically triggers action in the other.

Trump was making legal moves BEFORE the deadline was up. You are trying to criminal those legal moves.

 

[postman]

No evidence of the crime?!!! Are you retarded? Every drone strike is recorded and documented. No one is even denying Obama did it, not even Obama himself.

The president is commander in chief. Which means he has the power to command the military to take whatever actions he commands, short of violating the laws of war.

 

[Godboy]

When did they make war illegal?

Youve got some bizarre beliefs about how government should work.

I was in the military dipshit, so i know that the top of the US military chain of command is "The Commander in Chief"

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

No evidence of the crime?!!! Are you retarded? Every drone strike is recorded and documented. No one is even denying Obama did it, not even Obama himself.

The unwarranted, wrongheaded defense of the insane notion that presidents are above the law is motivated solely by Trump being a Republican; this is yet another example of the right’s contempt for the rule of law.