NWO/Illuminati US politics - Pt 2

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
https://missouriindependent.com/202...icial-acts-supreme-court-rules-in-trump-case/

As I predicted. The President does enjoy a level of immunity for official acts within his core constitutional functions (similar to the immunities of our Crown).

Now let's see if the SCOTUS can twist 'engaging in a conspiracy to subvert a legitimate election and install himself as President' as being a 'core constitutional' power of the Presidency.

Our High Court would clearly rule that a PM engaging in that kind of activity is not acting within the core responsibilities and duties of the PM; in fact, such a thing would be repugnant to the core responsibilities and duties of a PM, and antithetical to the Constitution and our liberal democracy.

I have little doubt the SCOTUS will twist the law into a 6-3 decision basically letting him (or any other President who seeks to literally engage in a conspiracy to reject lawful election results and install themselves for another term) off the hook.

And the USA will be all the poorer for it.
LOL. No you didn't!

In fact the crap you were spouting was Nixon V Fitzgerald dissent as if it was the majority opinion and law and again not supported in this decision.

The only redeeming feature of this post is the next sentence, the only sane thing you've said and must have been taken from someone else.
 
LOL. No you didn't say (the SCOTUS would rule for Sovereign immunity)!

Yes, I did. Several times (including in this thread, and in response to your own post).

Here:

The only thing that stops him running is the (6/3 conservative majority, with 3 Trump appointees) SCOTUS.

My strong suspicion is the SCOTUS will find a way to grant him Presidential immunity in a convoluted and legally flawed judgement and overturn the bans on him running in some States that have already banned him under the insurrection clause.

Here:

Re the immunity clause, the SCOTUS will rule for at least limited Criminal immunity IMO.

Here:

What worries me about the argument (and there is some legal merit to it by the way) is that if it stacks up, the President can only be held to account by a majority vote of the Legislature.

Here:

He's immune from civil suit on account of actions taken as President. Maybe also criminal (but that's not clear yet).

I directly stated on a number of occasions that the SCOTUS would likely rule that he has Sovereign immunity to some degree. I also explained the reasons why they would so rule (we have a similar system for our King/ executive). I also said they would do so via a 6/3 majority, and arrive there via torturous legal reasoning.

All of those things turned out as predicted.

See this is your problem. You're so cooked you don't bother to stop and read. I literally told you (on several occasions) that I thought that the SCOTUS would rule the POTUS has at least limited immunity from Criminal liability.

In this thread. In response to your own posts.

Learn to read mate.
 
Last edited:

Log in to remove this ad.

EasternTiger, you must be similarly chuffed to hear that the gr8 man has been handed immunity. A true lightning rod is our Donald.

Speaking of lightning, I will be giving a speech on the physics of it at Mensa this Friday titled High-Altitude Weather Kinetics and Tropospheric Upper-Altitude Hydrodynamics (HAWK-TUAH for short). Please arrive dressed as your favourite Skibidi Toilet character.
Only as President. Not for his litany of sex crimes committed as a private citizen, which Trump supporters seen to think is ok.


Maga = sickness.
 
You're saying you're hoping the POTUS actively engages in criminal conduct?

Why on earth would you desire such a thing?
He's genuinely unwell.
 
Coz he's a fash-curious bootlicker. Couldn't care less as long as his guy is wearing the boots.
Dictators don't exist without useful idiots.
 
Only as President. Not for his litany of sex crimes committed as a private citizen, which Trump supporters seen to think is ok.


Maga = sickness.
"Alleged" sex crimes m8. Whatever happened to the presumption of innocence!
 
"Alleged" sex crimes m8. Whatever happened to the presumption of innocence!
The "Lock her up!" / "Laptop!" crew certainly change their tune on a regular basis, don't they?

Multiple allegations, multiple victims over multiple years. Only a cult could get comfortable with ignoring sex crimes for "their" guy.
 
"Alleged" sex crimes m8. Whatever happened to the presumption of innocence!

Alleged sex crimes from over 20 different women.

Levelled against a bloke on record stating he 'grabs women by the pussy without waiting for consent', owned the Miss Teen USA pageant, stated he wanted to 'date his own daughter' and described his best mate Jeffery Epstein as 'A great guy, who likes his girls a little on the young side, just like me'.

Definitely not suss at all.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

1720069051480.png
Oh, it'll be a repost to a link to some Russian bot from Twitter as 'authority', followed by waffle misrepresenting the whole argument, and then will conclude by drawing bizarre conclusions blaming whomever the Russians tell him to blame (Biden probably).

And then afterwards, deny doing it.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.258148/gov.uscourts.dcd.258148.171.0.pdf

That's the judgement. Her Honor basically says exactly what I said she would say, just over 47 odd pages.

I'm only partway through. I haven't gotten to the bit yet where her Honor seeks to characterize a President acting to literally overturn an election he lost, knowingly and willfully, as part of a Criminal conspiracy to remain in power after that loss as being repugnant to his duties as President and to the Constitution itself (and thus leaning him unable to avail himself of any protections available to a President, even should some be available to him).

Or 'If you act contrary to your fundamental role and duty as the President, you can't rely on any protections being President might afford you (even should those protections exist in the first place).'


And as I said, didn't allow oral arguments.

A memorandum opinion by a single judge, already shown bias against Trump, denies motion to dismiss based on Presidential immunity, without a hearing to allow for oral arguments.

Who the **** do you think argued for and against?

No one.

Should be on the first page and impossible to miss.

Puppet masters are going tick tock.

This is only from a couple of pages and before I look at your misconstrued rants about Nixon V Fitzgerald.
 
"Alleged" sex crimes m8. Whatever happened to the presumption of innocence!
That particular one from 2016 was withdrawn with Trump hating journalists admitting they thought it was made up and they weren't even sure if this was a real person.

This has been refuted before, but poor Mof is still reeling from the "Fine People" Charlotte claims being debunked by everyone including Snopes and cognitive dissonance and all that!
 
That particular one from 2016 was withdrawn with Trump hating journalists admitting they thought it was made up and they weren't even sure if this was a real person.

This has been refuted before, but poor Mof is still reeling from the "Fine People" Charlotte claims being debunked by everyone including Snopes and cognitive dissonance and all that!
Oh welcome back!

PS there are 20+ allegations. Not just one. That ol' cherry picking again.

There is no level of depravity the cult will overlook.
 
Do you think its a good thing that Biden can order Seal Team 6 to murder Trump in his bed?

Yes or No will suffice.
Attaboy!

Knew the real you would surface!!

Not true, but when has consuming and spewing the latest media hysteria stopped you?
 
Oh welcome back!

PS there are 20+ allegations. Not just one. That ol' cherry picking again.

There is no level of depravity the cult will overlook.
Thanks. I get a day off now and then.

You talking about Epstein again??

Can't be about having inappropriate showers with your daughter?

Trump is such a a weird self flagellating thing with you.
 
Last edited:
Thanks. I get a day off now and then.

You talking about Epstein again??

Can't be having inappropriate showers with your daughter.

Trump is such a a weird self flagellating thing with you.
You're hilarious 😂

Never change
 
He's genuinely unwell.
Biden is genuinely unwell.

But the mainstream media have not allowed any talk about that.

Until they put him on display and couldn't deny it anymore.

How funny was making up the term 'cheap fake' to excuse it. And some still are. LOL.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top