Do you think that current and former Presidents and VPs should be immune from state prosecution?
|
antithesis
|
Posted 12:59 am, 06/26/2024
|
No, there is no immunity from state crimes but don't see how many traffic and drug charges there is going to be with Secret Service protection.
In this case, the Act would also give them immunity from prosecution if they committed the crimes before taking office...
But there is rules that must be followed and the democrat party has gone too far. January 6 committee destroyed evidence that I can only assume would exonerate Trump.
I'm not following... how would they have impacted his trial for fraud that he committed in 2016?
So after numerous investigations by Trump hating democrats, Anti do you think Trump actually committed crimes...
Considering that he was unanimously found to be guilty by a jury that his attorneys helped to pick, and we know for a fact that at least two of them were Trump supporters before the trial? Yes, I absolutely believe that he committed fraud.
...and would he have been charged if not for the election.
Oh no, there's absolutely no doubt in my mind that he would not have been charged.
But bringing it to local politics for a second, do you think that Stoney Greene would have been investigated for 20 years of dog fighting had he not ran for office? Or that anyone would have cared about him slapping around his wife and kid? Of course not... but he put the spotlight on himself.
Now if all the actual crimes that had been done had by democrats been criminally charged, I say go for it but this a two tier legal system
There's a problem with your logic. Right now you assume that crimes have been committed by Democrats, but with no charges or trial then you don't see any actual evidence... only speculation.
But we know for an indisputable fact that Trump at least committed fraud, because he was tried and convicted. And we saw the evidence.
You can't fairly claim that others are guilty without any evidence, that's just speculation.
"THIS guy did it so you KNOW that guy must have done it..."
|
|
gmiller
|
Posted 10:24 pm, 06/25/2024
|
No, there is no immunity from state crimes but don't see how many traffic and drug charges there is going to be with Secret Service protection. Each party does opposition research and if there is an inkling of criminal activity, it will come out before Election Day. But there is rules that must be followed and the democrat party has gone too far. January 6 committee destroyed evidence that I can only assume would exonerate Trump. I guess they learned it from Hillary destroying subpoenaed documents. Now as the Miranda rights state, you have a right to an attorney unless your name is Trump. If you represent Trump, there is no such thing as attorney client privilege and his attorneys are told not to represent Trump or we will come after you. Jack Smith had Trump's attorney hauled in front of the grand jury. Now you have the attorney general of New York going after anything conservative, the NRA, the Catholic Church, and of course Trump. Any prosecutor who states there are going after a person instead of a crime should be permanently disbarred. Alvin Bragg's case was nothing but politics. The case was turned down twice by federal prosecutors twice and Alvin Bragg himself once. What changed? The current election. Their hatred for Trump will destroy the state of New York which I don't care except we will all be paying for it. So after numerous investigations by Trump hating democrats, Anti do you think Trump actually committed crimes and would he have been charged if not for the election. Now if all the actual crimes that had been done had by democrats been criminally charged, I say go for it but this a two tier legal system
|
|
singer
|
Posted 2:01 pm, 06/25/2024
|
Jack Smith admits to evidence tampering .
|
|
singer
|
Posted 11:08 am, 06/25/2024
|
And right now in Fla. Jack Smith in on trial about his actions and corrupt acts of the FBI during the raid on Mar a largo.
The court has just been told the FBI turned off all the cameras before the searched the place. And they staged photos and rearranged classified docs to Trump They are the criminals and it all going on in front of the judge they tried to get recused.
See how all this is going folks?
|
|
singer
|
Posted 10:31 am, 06/25/2024
|
 All presidents MUST have immunity. They can't go around second guessing themselves when they need to act quickly . No VP needs it.
And the only reason it's before the SC in the firat place is because it is just more LAWFARE against Trump.
Has never been a question before Trump/
So here is what is likely to be the outcome. The SC will issue a complex ruling. Then they will send it back to Jack Smith and ask him to specify what crimes Trump committed con cerning J 6.
More revelations of the corrupt lawfare against Trump forthcoming . At this same time Andy Biggs is bringing all the crimes of the committee and of Pelosi's words about surcurity in that car.
Now the J 6 committee is exposed in all their crimes against the people . The Trump tried to 'grab the wheeel ' lie and the fact the comm. knew it was a lie.
The comm refusing to allow the SS to tell it was all a lie. All to frame Trump.
I foresee a day when Navaro and Bannon will file lawsuits against Chaney and others.
And all those arrested under all these false charges have grounds to sue.
And the relatives all those who killed themselves .... I hope that take every thing from those responsible . Polosi, and the committee . And the rinos that were a part of it.
|
|
freerangethinker
|
Posted 7:21 am, 06/25/2024
|
The problem is though that the prosecutor has the authority to go after anyone they choose while electing to not charge the other campaign for doing the exact same thing. One could argue that what the Clinton campaign did was even worse. The Clinton campaign was fined for election interference and the Trump campaign was not but that doesn't matter to a biased DA. There's no way to have the law applied fairly when emotions and campaign promises are involved.
|
|
antithesis
|
Posted 12:58 am, 06/25/2024
|
Senator Thom Tillis introduced the "No More Political Prosecutions Act," which would protect current and former Presidents and Vice Presidents from state prosecution...
I think it's interesting, really. A state judge and Constitutionally selected jury found Trump to be guilty, and now the GOP wants to claim that he should have been immune to prosecution by simply holding office.
I believe that what they're doing is a real problem. Not only are they denouncing our entire judicial system, but they're also trying to set a precedent where politicians can just commit crimes carte blanche.
Further, since it seems to protect them from crimes committed before they're elected, it also gives mobsters a reason to run for office! They win, and suddenly all is forgiven...
|
|
surfer
|
Posted 9:43 pm, 06/24/2024
|
I'm not a democrat or republican but i can see that convected felon former failed president trump definitely has zero morals.
|
|
Thomas Hobbes
|
Posted 9:29 pm, 06/24/2024
|
Don't ever worry what a Democrat thinks. The party of perverts has no morals.
|
|
freerangethinker
|
Posted 9:13 pm, 06/24/2024
|
Guilt is also subjective and partisans are clearly biased. That is what happened in New York.
|
|
1goddess
|
Posted 6:46 pm, 06/24/2024
|
"republicans have a ton more integrity than democrats"
Please provide proof of said statement!
No one is above the law, period! If a judge cannot administer their duty in a courtroom, then they should recuse themself and should be held accountable if a higher court or prosecutor and or defense attorney feels that the judge is biased in any form.
Fairness is subjective.
|
|
Joseph T.
|
Posted 6:39 pm, 06/24/2024
|
If it happens while they are in office the US Constitution comes into play with impeachment if the crime happens after they leave office then regular law should apply.
|
|
the dog's butler
|
Posted 6:24 pm, 06/24/2024
|
If you do the crime, you do the time.
|
|
freerangethinker
|
Posted 6:22 pm, 06/24/2024
|
I think it is impossible for any former president to get a fair trial in today's political climate. You seem to think a judge appointed by a president can't be impartial but the same can be said for a judge appointed by a president from a different party. There is virtually no way to get an impartial judge or jury anymore. Could you imagine if a DA from a deep red Texas county says he is going to prosecute Biden for election interference? There is no way he would get a fair trial. There would be republican elected judge and a republican jury. Liberals would be screaming at the top of their lungs about how unfair that would be. I personally hope it happens just to prove a point but republicans have a ton more integrity than democrats so it probably will not.
|
|
GoNC
|
Posted 6:18 pm, 06/24/2024
|
I removed a few posts for trolling.
|
|
Thomas Hobbes
|
Posted 6:15 pm, 06/24/2024
|
It doesn't matter now. Because of what the Democrats have done we are broken beyond repair. And I'm voting for RFKjr.
|
|
surfer
|
Posted 6:09 pm, 06/24/2024
|
NO..NOBODY IS ABOVE THE LAW.....PERIOD!
|
|
antithesis
|
Posted 6:03 pm, 06/24/2024
|
Be honest... do you think that all Presidents and Vice Presidents, current and former, should be forever immune from prosecution for state crimes?
State crimes include assault, drug offenses, DWIs, and theft.
If you say "yes," do you think that this immunity should apply to all Presidents and VPs, or only those in your party?
And do you think that a President or Vice President could ever be given a fair Federal trial when they were directly involved in the appointment of the judge?
|
|
|
