Be more specific. What type of immunity.Just wondering.
Well, he has asked for blanket immunity I believe.....which we can all probably agree doesn't make sense.Be more specific. What type of immunity.
Let the record show I don't want former presidents on trial or in prison for anything less than treason or fomenting insurrection. As defined by statute, not vague comments or "he waited three hours to do anything."
You order your raging case of bds??Oh yay, Illegal shifts TDS rearing it’s head again.
Very. Well. Said.Be more specific. What type of immunity.
Let the record show I don't want former presidents on trial or in prison for anything less than treason or fomenting insurrection. As defined by statute, not vague comments or "he waited three hours to do anything."
National Security. Presidents get gangsta and do dirty on the regular. I don't need to know what rough men do in darkness on my behalf, I just need them to get that shit done.Well, he has asked for blanket immunity I believe.....which we can all probably agree doesn't make sense.
But your OK with a president committing all other manner of crimes?
BTW, the "I love you, your very special" part of it wasn't vague at all.
Trump has never asked for blanket immunity.Well, he has asked for blanket immunity I believe.....which we can all probably agree doesn't make sense.
But your OK with a president committing all other manner of crimes?
BTW, the "I love you, your very special" part of it wasn't vague at all.
You don’t want to tangle with Lord on legal issues.Very. Well. Said.
So Richard Nixon bugged the Watergate hotel on your behalf?National Security. Presidents get gangsta and do dirty on the regular. I don't need to know what rough men do in darkness on my behalf, I just need them to get that shit done.
that's a bad example. I'm speaking more of Obama and drone attacks that whack civilians along with high value targets.So Richard Nixon bugged the Watergate hotel on your behalf?
So then, perhaps you would agree with me that there is a difference between a president doing something in the name of the country.....lets pick something else from closer to that time period.....say the Iran-Contra affair for which Reagan, IMO, should never be prosecuted and what Nixon did for his own personal political gain and should be?that's a bad example. I'm speaking more of Obama and drone attacks that whack civilians along with high value targets.
Yes. Theres no way in bloody hell a light bird had that kind of power.So then, perhaps you would agree with me that there is a difference between a president doing something in the name of the country.....lets pick something else from closer to that time period.....say the Iran-Contra affair for which Reagan, IMO, should never be prosecuted and what Nixon did for his own personal political gain and should be?
Blanket immunity from gawt dammmed Democrat lawfare to keep him off the ballot? Absolutely.Well, he has asked for blanket immunity I believe.....which we can all probably agree doesn't make sense.
But your OK with a president committing all other manner of crimes?
BTW, the "I love you, your very special" part of it wasn't vague at all.
But Obama and his Deep State bugging Trump Towers was A Okay with you? 😂So Richard Nixon bugged the Watergate hotel on your behalf?
You are as much a conservative this shitbird is.........😂So then, perhaps you would agree with me that there is a difference between a president doing something in the name of the country.....lets pick something else from closer to that time period.....say the Iran-Contra affair for which Reagan, IMO, should never be prosecuted and what Nixon did for his own personal political gain and should be?
Just wondering.
He will ignore this one....libs gonna libBut Obama and his Deep State bugging Trump Towers was A Okay with you? 😂
![]()
His lawyers are arguing for blanket/absolute immunity.Trump has never asked for blanket immunity.
We have a thing called the Presidential Records Act. Which I will point out doesn’t apply to Senators and Vice Presidents.
And what crimes has he committed?
And *you’re
It’s a conjunction of “you are”. As in, “you are very special”. Very special isn’t a noun, so the possessive ‘your’ makes no sense.
Hope this helps.
They said that there are people who would welcome a dictator type President...They ain't lying!Yes. Theres no way in bloody hell a light bird had that kind of power.
No, he isn't. That's how Jack Smith is trying to portray his request.His lawyers are arguing for blanket/absolute immunity.
This time you're talking out your ass. Every president does this stuff. You should hear about the shit FDR got up to.They said that there are people who would welcome a dictator type President...They ain't lying!
i mean of all the crimes these crooks have gotten away with, pretty comical ..So Richard Nixon bugged the Watergate hotel on your behalf?
you know coming to your boy's rescue of every single thing diminishes whatever crediblity you think you have.. Try not being a slurper for 3 days. Starting now.No, he isn't. That's how Jack Smith is trying to portray his request.
He's making the case that a president can't be tried for official acts undertaken as President.
We've been over this. Remember Obama ordering a drone strike on a US citizen abroad, killing him without a fair trial?
Under Jack Smith's interpretation Obama could be tried for murder upon leaving office.
Im going to tell you what I told my man K. Former presidents get secret service protection for life because of what they know. We have any number of terrorists, foreign spies and random unclassified foreign nationals in federal prison. So no, i give zero effs about anything that doesn't have national security implications. It's not that they're above the law, its about the security of our Nation.But your OK with a president committing all other manner of crimes?
I seriously don't get why we argue or debate about things because you guys refuse to read. Multiple court filings reference and mention Trump lawyers arguing this. the judges even mentions it. Judge Pan asked his lawyer if he is immune from killing a rival.No, he isn't. That's how Jack Smith is trying to portray his request.
He's making the case that a president can't be tried for official acts undertaken as President.
We've been over this. Remember Obama ordering a drone strike on a US citizen abroad, killing him without a fair trial?
Under Jack Smith's interpretation Obama could be tried for murder upon leaving office.
Stand on your views! I didn't look but I am sure that you are in the multiple Biden crime threads saying that Biden can do whatever he wants as president. I am sure that you are consistent and you are saying that to Nails, navii, Fatman etcThis time you're talking out your ass. Every president does this stuff. You should hear about the shit FDR got up to.
I am consistent. I said neither Trump nor Biden should get any fallout for this document thing.Stand on your views! I didn't look but I am sure that you are in the multiple Biden crime threads saying that Biden can do whatever he wants as president. I am sure that you are consistent and you are saying that to Nails, navii, Fatman etc.
And before you ask, I think anyone that commits a crime should be charged, including Biden. I have said that repeatedly.
JFC stop using common idioms if you can't use them correctly.I am not going down a red herring with you about Obama.
So Richard Nixon bugged the Watergate hotel on your behalf?
This time you're talking out your ass. Every president does this stuff. You should hear about the shit FDR got up to.
I definitely used it correctlyJFC stop using common idioms if you can't use them correctly.
I definitely used it correctly
Well I'm sure to see those post, you know for consistency.I am consistent. I said neither Trump nor Biden should get any fallout for this document thing.
Impeachment on the other hand, I have no problem with.
I believe I said specifically Biden needs to cut his idiot son loose before he brings him down.
And if you refer to the very first post if mine in this thread, I believe I made an exception for treason. Treason is defined as "levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere."
Russia and China are our enemies. Connect the dots.
Once again with feeling, short of treason or insurrection, Biden is a president and I don't want him anywhere near a witness stand or prison.
What the actual foxtrot does going down a red herring mean?I definitely used it correctly
Best get on that research then, player.Well I'm sure to see those post, you know for consistency.