Supreme Court to decide Trump immunity claim

[Bowlmania]

More to come

I already know what's coming, if it's presented through the lens of CoH: Total exoneration!

 

[82hoosier]

One cannot pass high school US history without being able to correctly explain this. And it would be considered a no-brainer.

 

[hoot1]

I don’t think there are many lawyers, if any, who would have advised that Trumps conduct were crimes as alleged in the Bragg case, the DC case, or the Georgia case. And throw in the James civil case. and we see all of this involve very unique and unprecedented applications of the law. They are abuses of the system aimed at Trump, not legitimate applications of the law aimed at protecting a public interest.

The documents case is different. But just in the last few days, the Judge announced she will release documents about the GSA and these documents that the Biden Justice Department desperately tried to keep from public view. More to come on that one.

CoH, always impressed with the way you word things.

For example, you used the phrase "unique and unprecidented".

Couldn't this phrase also apply to actions taken by President Trump which have resulted in the court cases ?

 

[CO. Hoosier]

CoH, always impressed with the way you word things.

For example, you used the phrase "unique and unprecidented".

Couldn't this phrase also apply to actions taken by President Trump which have resulted in the court cases ?

I’ve heard and read that argument often.

I don’t buy it.

Criminal law has to have consistency and predictability. Unprecedented, unusual, and tortured applications of the law in order to target an individual is not consistent with any view of due process. People often mention al Capone in this context. His tax evasion was a pretty standard application of the tax law even though Capone was the first one nailed for not reporting ill-gotten money as income.

There is nothing standard or ordinary about the Trump prosecutions except for the documents case,

 

[dbmhoosier]

Since when is undermining the election in the scope of presidential duties?

The fact that you are comfortable with someone interfering in the very election that they are running in says a lot.

That was campaign Trump. Campaign stuff has nothing to do with presidential duties. Read up on Hatch Act. Trump and his cronies got caught ignoring that numerous times.

Oh

 

[IU_Hickory]

Oh

View embedded media

So you are saying Trump wasn't doing official duties when he was messing with the election.

Glad we are on the same page.

And no, investigating Trump on his election bs isn't an issue..

 

[mcmurtry66]

So you are saying Trump wasn't doing official duties when he was messing with the election.

Glad we are on the same page.

And no, investigating Trump on his election bs isn't an issue..

Did your propaganda feed tell you that?

I love when you talk law