Did you edit as I responded? I didn't see that line. Sorry.
I fully disagree as the looney left has made no high-level attempt at all to change our government. But, you are entitled to that opinion.
Supreme Court
- Thread starter PF5
- Start date
I fully disagree as the looney left has made no high-level attempt at all to change our government. But, you are entitled to that opinion.
What do the Dems actually believe?
Well the Supreme Court just gave Presidents absolutely immunity from prosecution for anything they do as long as it's an "official act", placing Presidents even more above the law than they already are. We have a Democrat President, Republicans watching from the outside and Democrats are the ones saying this is wrong no one should have this much power. If that tells you anything.
I never said you...I pointed out that people in an extremist far right propaganda bubble are this way
Sorry you felt I was specifically speaking about you....I think the other poster was talking about u though
But hey....if the shoe fits and whatnot.
So you don't know what they really believe either? Serious question: Do you think Obama should have been prosecuted for droning American citizens?
One life to live and you are spending it in a cult led by a man who was born a billionaire and gives zero shites about you. What a waste.
If congress had not passed the AUMF and the citizen was not acting as a combatant in the conflict covered by the AUMF then yes.
And assuming he directly and actually authorized or directed any such drone attacks.
What about the 3 that he droned by accident. To take it further... should the parents of children slain by illegal aliens be able to prosecute the POTUS that allowed the illegal into the country?
Holder: We've Droned 4 Americans, 3 By Accident. Oops.
Although President Obama this week approved the infamous Disposition Matrix, the bureaucratic codification of the administration’s so-called targeted killing program, and Attorney General Eric Holder admitted to Congress that U.S. drone strikes have killed four Americans abroad since 2009, Noah...
www.brookings.edu
The ones he was not aware of would be even lower on my concern list. You think an American ciitizen in a war zone acting against America's interests should be protected by prosecuting a president for accidentally killing them along with combatants? Back when I was a republican, we used to make "personal responsibility" arguments against the libs wanting the government to protect us against everything. I guess I consider a foreign terrorist encampment as not a "safe space" like MAGA.What about the 3 that he droned by accident. To take it further... should the parents of children slain by illegal aliens be able to prosecute the POTUS that allowed the illegal into the country?
Holder: We've Droned 4 Americans, 3 By Accident. Oops.
Although President Obama this week approved the infamous Disposition Matrix, the bureaucratic codification of the administration’s so-called targeted killing program, and Attorney General Eric Holder admitted to Congress that U.S. drone strikes have killed four Americans abroad since 2009, Noah...
Sure, let's start prosecuting government officials for someone breaking a law that is tied to policy decisions. Which means that we will prosecute the SCOTUS justices for the murders that are going to happen 18 or so years from now after the abortion ban.
https://www.economist.com/by-invita...-defend-a-finding-made-famous-by-freakonomics
let me get this straight. Someone commits a CRIME by coming here Illegally, then they commit yet another crime after they have come here illegally and you want to hold the President of the United States responsible for that crime the illegal Immigrant committed? What ever happened to Self Responsibility ?? You're litterally calling for a NANNY stateWhat about the 3 that he droned by accident. To take it further... should the parents of children slain by illegal aliens be able to prosecute the POTUS that allowed the illegal into the country?
Holder: We've Droned 4 Americans, 3 By Accident. Oops.
Although President Obama this week approved the infamous Disposition Matrix, the bureaucratic codification of the administration’s so-called targeted killing program, and Attorney General Eric Holder admitted to Congress that U.S. drone strikes have killed four Americans abroad since 2009, Noah...
HINT...if someone else commits a CRIME and breaks into a Warehouse, then after that they commit another CRIME and steal everything in the Warehouse....you don't have to give the Manager of the WAREHOUSE IMMUNITY to not be prosecuted
I'm trying to make the point that there absolutely has to be at least some sort of presidential immunity. I don't think Obama should be prosecuted and I also don't think Biden should be when the acts are in their official capacity. And yes sorry, that goes for Trump too. Without it every decision becomes even more complicated.
I literally just showed you one MASSIVE example of what Democrats believe vs Republicans and it skipped off your brain like a rock on a smooth pond!So no answer? And lol at the Trump BS
lol. The one massive thing that Democrats believe is that the President should not have immunity for official acts?
Give me an example. ANY example in AMERICAN HISTORY where the POTUS WASN'T Already given presidential immunity for an official Act ?
the simple fact is that POTUS ALREADY had this and official acts were ALWAYS overlooked.
Then Trump come in and did some "UNOFFICIAL" Acts and is trying to cover his ass by starting all this crap.
the simple fact is that POTUS has ALWAYS been granted immunity for OFFICIAL Acts throughout all of American History ....Trump just wants to paint a Grey area into it and be able to DEFINE his OWN playing space for immunity...
You don't even have any idea what that means.
Well they gave POTUS immunity on all official acts...recordings of Biden's testimony are thus official acts and GOP contempt charges against Merrick Garland are no longer valid as Biden is immune
The House Contempt Suit Against Garland Ironically Falls Prey To The Court’s Absolute Immunity
www.forbes.com
The House Contempt Suit Against Garland Ironically Falls Prey To The Court’s Absolute Immunity
The House Contempt Suit Against Garland Ironically Falls Prey To The Court’s Absolute Immunity
The House is suing for contempt of Congress demanding audio tapes of President Biden. Ironically, House Republicans collide with the just-issued Supreme Court ruling on President Trump's absolute immunity.
www.forbes.com
Similar threads
