Liberal Forum
Archive
‹
Political Chat Rooms
‹
No Holds Barred Political Forum
‹
Breaking News! President Trump has presidential immunity
Breaking News! President Trump has presidential immunity
By Warcok
1 Jul 2024 9:50 am in No Holds Barred Political Forum
1 Jul 2024 8:35 pm
1 Jul 2024 8:36 pm
That's just stupid.
Did Congress lose their power to impeach and remove?
Fact is that you did this. Whomever is running the country behind Joe Biden, directed the DoJ to take Trump out, and they tried and failed.
What is the old saying about what happens when you try to kill the King, and fail?
1 Jul 2024 8:46 pm
did biden sleep with stormy and blame trump?golfboy » 01 Jul 2024, 8:36 pm » wrote: ↑ That's just stupid.
Did Congress lose their power to impeach and remove?
Fact is that you did this. Whomever is running the country behind Joe Biden, directed the DoJ to take Trump out, and they tried and failed.
What is the old saying about what happens when you try to kill the King, and fail?
----------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------For example, in United States v. Nixon,3 the Court held that President Richard Nixon was amenable to a subpoena to produce evidence for use in a federal criminal case. There, the President had argued that he was immune to judicial process, claiming that the independence of the Executive Branch within its own sphere insulates a President from a judicial subpoena in an ongoing criminal prosecution.4 The Supreme Court unanimously disagreed, holding that neither the doctrine of separation of powers, nor the need for confidentiality of high-level communications, without more, can sustain an absolute, unqualified Presidential privilege of immunity from judicial process under all circumstances.5 The Court noted that the constitutional duty of courts to do justice in criminal prosecutions was counterbalanced by the claim of presidential immunity. To accept the President’s argument, the Court further reasoned, would undermine the separation of powers that was at the core of a workable government as well as gravely impair the role of the courts under Art. III.6Throughout the Watergate investigation, it was unclear whether the President could be subject to criminal prosecution prior to being convicted upon impeachment.7 The Court, however, resolved that courts may require the President to testify or produce documents in criminal proceedings.8 This principle dates to the earliest days of the Republic, when Chief Justice John Marshall presided as the Circuit Justice for Virginia over the treason trial of Aaron Burr. In that case, Chief Justice Marshall concluded that President Thomas Jefferson could be subject to a subpoena to provide a document relevant to the trial.9 Specifically, Chief Justice Marshall declared that, in contrast to common law privileges afforded the King of England, the President was not exempt from the general provisions of the constitution, like the Sixth Amendment, which provides the defense compulsory process.10
1 Jul 2024 8:48 pm
golfboy » 01 Jul 2024, 8:36 pm » wrote: ↑ That's just stupid.
Did Congress lose their power to impeach and remove?
Fact is that you did this. Whomever is running the country behind Joe Biden, directed the DoJ to take Trump out, and they tried and failed.
What is the old saying about what happens when you try to kill the King, and fail?
NAME ONE THING THAT DICTATOR TRUMP CAN'T DO!!!!!!
1 Jul 2024 8:50 pm
golfboy » 01 Jul 2024, 8:36 pm » wrote: ↑ That's just stupid.
Did Congress lose their power to impeach and remove?
Fact is that you did this. Whomever is running the country behind Joe Biden, directed the DoJ to take Trump out, and they tried and failed.
What is the old saying about what happens when you try to kill the King, and fail?
with presidential immunity there can be no impeachment.
1 Jul 2024 8:50 pm
"The Supreme Court unanimously disagreed, holding that neither the doctrine of separation of powers, nor the need for confidentiality of high-level communications, without more, can sustain an absolute, unqualified Presidential privilege of immunity from judicial process under all circumstances."jerrab » 01 Jul 2024, 8:46 pm » wrote: ↑ did biden sleep with stormy and blame trump?
----------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------For example, in United States v. Nixon,3 the Court held that President Richard Nixon was amenable to a subpoena to produce evidence for use in a federal criminal case. There, the President had argued that he was immune to judicial process, claiming that the independence of the Executive Branch within its own sphere insulates a President from a judicial subpoena in an ongoing criminal prosecution.4 The Supreme Court unanimously disagreed, holding that neither the doctrine of separation of powers, nor the need for confidentiality of high-level communications, without more, can sustain an absolute, unqualified Presidential privilege of immunity from judicial process under all circumstances.5 The Court noted that the constitutional duty of courts to do justice in criminal prosecutions was counterbalanced by the claim of presidential immunity. To accept the President’s argument, the Court further reasoned, would undermine the separation of powers that was at the core of a workable government as well as gravely impair the role of the courts under Art. III.6Throughout the Watergate investigation, it was unclear whether the President could be subject to criminal prosecution prior to being convicted upon impeachment.7 The Court, however, resolved that courts may require the President to testify or produce documents in criminal proceedings.8 This principle dates to the earliest days of the Republic, when Chief Justice John Marshall presided as the Circuit Justice for Virginia over the treason trial of Aaron Burr. In that case, Chief Justice Marshall concluded that President Thomas Jefferson could be subject to a subpoena to provide a document relevant to the trial.9 Specifically, Chief Justice Marshall declared that, in contrast to common law privileges afforded the King of England, the President was not exempt from the general provisions of the constitution, like the Sixth Amendment, which provides the defense compulsory process.10
Well, it's a good thing today's ruling didn't contradict that finding, and didn't give Trump "immunity from judicial process under all circumstances".
1 Jul 2024 8:51 pm
lol. Sorry, but pulling stupid **** like that out of your *** isn't going to win you any arguments.
1 Jul 2024 8:52 pm
Since there is no "Dictator Trump", it can't happen.
1 Jul 2024 8:56 pm
We do not live in a democracy you moron, we live in a constitutional republic
1 Jul 2024 8:57 pm
We don't live in a democracy
1 Jul 2024 9:07 pm
we live in a dictatorship now.
1 Jul 2024 9:08 pm
NAME ONE THING THAT DICTATOR TRUMP CAN'T DO!!!!!!
1 Jul 2024 9:10 pm
--------------------------------
The Constitution establishes a federal democratic republic form of government. That is, we have an indivisible union of 50 sovereign States. It is a democracy because people govern themselves. It is representative because people choose elected officials by free and secret ballot.
1 Jul 2024 9:16 pm
So no response that SCOTUS didn't grant complete immunity, and that Congress can impeach and remove a President to breaks the law?jerrab » 01 Jul 2024, 9:10 pm » wrote: ↑ --------------------------------
The Constitution establishes a federal democratic republic form of government. That is, we have an indivisible union of 50 sovereign States. It is a democracy because people govern themselves. It is representative because people choose elected officials by free and secret ballot.
You know, like ignoring immigration laws and letting 10s of millions of illegals into America, ignoring SCOTUS rulings and "forgiving" loans he has no authority over?
1 Jul 2024 9:21 pm
Electing your Congress critter and senators is through Democratic mob rule, but not the presidency, *******jerrab » 01 Jul 2024, 9:10 pm » wrote: ↑ --------------------------------
The Constitution establishes a federal democratic republic form of government. That is, we have an indivisible union of 50 sovereign States. It is a democracy because people govern themselves. It is representative because people choose elected officials by free and secret ballot.
1 Jul 2024 9:25 pm
you mean keeping all dicuments which is forbidden by the presidential records act??Presidential Records Act (PRA)In 1978, Congress passed the Presidential Records Act (PRA), which states that any records created or received by the President as part of his constitutional, statutory, or ceremonial duties are the property of the United States government and will be managed by NARA at the end of the administration.The Presidential Records Act (PRA) changed the legal status of Presidential and Vice Presidential materials. Under the PRA, the official records of the President and his staff are owned by the United States, not by the President.Presidential Records Act (PRA)In 1978, Congress passed the Presidential Records Act (PRA), which states that any records created or received by the President as part of his constitutional, statutory, or ceremonial duties are the property of the United States government and will be managed by NARA at the end of the administration.The Presidential Records Act (PRA) changed the legal status of Presidential and Vice Presidential materials. Under the PRA, the official records of the President and his staff are owned by the United States, not by the President.Presidential Records Act (PRA)In 1978, Congress passed the Presidential Records Act (PRA)In 1978, Congress passed the Presidential Records Act (PRA), which states that any records created or received by the President as part of his constitutional, statutory, or ceremonial duties are the property of the United States government and will be managed by NARA at the end of the administration.The Presidential Records Act (PRA) changed the legal status of Presidential and Vice Presidential materials. Under the PRA, the official records of the President and his staff are owned by the United States, not by the President. (PRA), which states that any records created or received by the President as part of his constitutional, statutory, or ceremonial duties are the property of the United States government and will be managed by NARA at the end of the administration.The Presidential Records Act (PRA) changed the legal status of Presidential and Vice Presidential materials. Under the PRA, the official records of the President and his staff are owned by the United States, not by the President.golfboy » 01 Jul 2024, 9:16 pm » wrote: ↑ So no response that SCOTUS didn't grant complete immunity, and that Congress can impeach and remove a President to breaks the law?
You know, like ignoring immigration laws and letting 10s of millions of illegals into America, ignoring SCOTUS rulings and "forgiving" loans he has no authority over?
1 Jul 2024 9:27 pm
golfboy » 01 Jul 2024, 9:16 pm » wrote: ↑ So no response that SCOTUS didn't grant complete immunity, and that Congress can impeach and remove a President to breaks the law?
You know, like ignoring immigration laws and letting 10s of millions of illegals into America, ignoring SCOTUS rulings and "forgiving" loans he has no authority over?
- Establishes in law that any incumbent Presidential records (whether textual or electronic) held on courtesy storage by the Archivist remain in the exclusive legal custody of the President and that any request or order for access to such records must be made to the President, not NARA.
- Establishes that Presidential records automatically transfer into the legal custody of the Archivist as soon as the President leaves office.
1 Jul 2024 9:28 pm
where do you live? russia?
1 Jul 2024 9:33 pm
JuCo 5 percenter...72
“Show me the man and I’ll find you the crime” ~ LAVRENTIY BERIA
"Try to get past your passionate ignorance and learn to accept what actually happened." ~ brown's unheeded words of wisdom 
If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with?
"Libruls are often fascists on vacation..." 
1 Jul 2024 9:34 pm
Hey, *******. The poster whose conversation you broke in on was relying on leftist spin to justify a conclusion.Beekeeper » 01 Jul 2024, 6:27 pm » wrote: ↑ That's the same as saying that the AMERICANS didn't need to listen to the Japs or NAZIS "spin" or "radio traffic" in order to kick their asses!!
INTEL of your ENEMIES is vital to winning the battles and war, ****!! But you stay stupid. Ir really behooves you.
If you're going to butt in, butt in intelligently, cogently, and on topic.
When you complain, ur friends roll their eyes and ur enemies rejoice
"Because I SAY I am" is a todler's tantrum, not "science"
You cannot betray me - only yourself, to me.
Who cuts off your dick is not a friend
An opinion you won't defend is not your own
Humanity's Law of the Jungle: Survival NOT of the fittest, but of the tribe
When peeing in the pool, stand on the edge
If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with?
"Because I SAY I am" is a todler's tantrum, not "science"
You cannot betray me - only yourself, to me.
Who cuts off your dick is not a friend
An opinion you won't defend is not your own
Humanity's Law of the Jungle: Survival NOT of the fittest, but of the tribe
When peeing in the pool, stand on the edge
If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with?
Who is online
In total there are 3497 users online :: 3 registered, 13 bots, and 3481 guests
Bots: proximic, GPTBot, LCC, MicroMessenger, YandexBot, ADmantX, CriteoBot, Mediapartners-Google, Googlebot, facebookexternalhit, Applebot, curl/7, bingbot