In a 6-3 decision, the SC that held the President has immunity for official acts. It was not a complete victory for Trump. In fact, the Court rejected Trump’s base case.
Supreme Court Rules Presidents Have Broad Immunity for Official Acts
Let’s go over the ruling point by point. Tell me what I have wrong. Here is the official Supreme Court Ruling. The snips below are my highlights.
Under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of Presidential power entitles a former President to absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority. And he is entitled to at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts. There is no immunity for unofficial acts.
President’s exercise of his core constitutional powers, this immunity
must be absolute. As for his remaining official actions, he is entitled to at least presumptive immunity.
Official Acts
Immunity from prosecution for official acts applies to all government agencies. The Supreme Court logically applied that to the President.
Contrary to hyperventilation by the Left, it does not protect the President from unofficial acts or unconstitutional acts.
Presumptive immunity means there must be a fact finding mission to decide what is or is not an official act and what is or is not a constitutional act.
Not all of the President’s official acts fall within his “conclusive and preclusive” authority. The reasons that justify the President’s absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for acts within the scope of his exclusive constitutional authority do not extend to conduct in areas where his authority is shared with Congress. To determine the President’s immunity in this context, the Court looks primarily to the Framers’ design of the Presidency within the separation of powers, precedent on Presidential immunity in the civil context, and criminal cases where a President resisted prosecutorial demands for documents.
When prosecutors have sought evidence from the President, the Court has consistently rejected Presidential claims of absolute immunity.
That alone tells you that a president cannot do anything and get away with it. Here is another statement that is even more clear.
Distinguishing Official Acts From Unofficial Ones
The first step in deciding whether a former President is entitled to immunity from a particular prosecution is to distinguish his official from unofficial actions. …
Presidents cannot be indicted based on conduct for which they are immune from prosecution. On remand, the District Court must carefully analyze the indictment’s remaining allegations to determine whether they too involve conduct for which a President must be immune from prosecution. And the parties and the District Court must ensure that sufficient allegations support the indictment’s charges without such conduct.
Distinguishing official acts from unofficial ones requires a prosecutorial hearing or fact finding mission to establish what is or is not an official act and what is or is not a constitutional act.
Such hearings are standard procedure for official acts. The Court merely extended the standard procedure to the office of president.
Court Blasts Trump’s Base Case to Outer Space
Trump asserts a far broader immunity than the limited one the Court recognizes, contending that the indictment must be dismissed because the Impeachment Judgment Clause requires that impeachment and Senate conviction precede a President’s criminal prosecution. But the text of the Clause does not address whether and on what conduct a President may be prosecuted if he was never impeached and convicted. See Art. I, §3, cl. 7. Historical evidence likewise lends little support to Trump’s position. The Federalist Papers on which Trump relies concerned the checks available against a sitting President; they did not endorse or even consider whether the Impeachment Judgment Clause immunizes a former President from prosecution. Transforming the political process of impeachment into a necessary step in the enforcement of criminal law finds little support in the text of the Constitution or the structure of the Nation’s Government.
Trump claimed to have absolute immunity. The Court blasted that claim to outer space.
Truman Example
If the President claims authority to act but in fact exercises mere “individual will” and “authority without law,” the courts may say so. Youngstown, 343 U. S., at 655 (Jackson, J., concurring). In Youngstown, for instance, we held that President Truman exceeded his constitutional authority when he seized most of the Nation’s steel mills.
The Court wisely referred to the Truman case.
On grounds of national defense, Truman tried to seize steel mills. The Court quickly told Truman no, that’s unconstitutional.
Mish Synopsis
The court rejected Trump’s base case, properly cited Truman as an unconstitutional example, and specifically applied its ruling to official acts.
Importantly, official acts must be constitutional!
Truman was acting “officially”, but not “constitutionally”.
Hyperventilation by the Left
Hyperventilation by the left was intense in all corners including Senator Richard Blumenthal, former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and many others.
Pelosi: “The ruling dangerously holds that official acts are inadmissible in trials for unofficial acts, giving the defendant a political gift.“
Can someone explain the logic of that sentence in understandable English?
Sen. Richard Blumenthal criticized the Supreme Court’s decision, saying it “puts lawbreaking presidents like Donald Trump above the law” and delays his criminal trial. Blumenthal called the ruling a “cravenly political decision to shield President Trump” and a “license for authoritarianism.”
Excuse me for asking, but how does outright rejection of Trump’s claim of absolute immunity, including examples, put Trump above the law?
Straight From the Loony Bin
Not Understanding the Meaning of Constitutional
The loony bin includes people you would think should know something about the constitution.
King Biden
People like David Leavitt, Nancy Pelosi, SarahCA , Adam Kinzinger and the DNC in general are the real threat.
They demand Trump be convicted for political purposes, constitutional or not.
Desperate Political Acts
The Left is so willing to do anything to preclude Trump from running that several states resorted to unconstitutional efforts to keep Trump off the ballot.
Then to top it off, the NY Attorney General prosecuted and won (temporarily) a hyped up case in New York that should never have been prosecuted at all.
That case will be overturn by a higher court or the Supreme Court, possibly this year if the New York judge stupidly sentences Trump to prison.
Instead of focusing on a legitimate case in Georgia involving election interference, the Left wasted its time on stupid cases.
Then prosecutor Fanni Willis turned the Georgia election case into a political shitshow.
Seriously, who is the greater threat to Democracy?
Trump Found Guilty – a Travesty of Justice for America
On May 30, I commented Trump Found Guilty – a Travesty of Justice for America
Trump was found guilty of a crime, but can anyone say what it is?
A misdemeanor, on which the Statute of Limitations had run out, was used to produced 34 felony counts on committing a Federal offense for which he was not charged.
If they can do this to Trump, they can do whatever they want to anyone. And they will, for political purposes.
Ultimate Irony
Democrats purposely timed all these cases to coincide with the election.
Except it totally backfired. Trump’s campaign coffers surged in response.
Thank you, Mish, for the most objective analysis I have seen so far.
I think TDS may have infiltrated Your site Mish!!
When people stop reading your post and blame you for what it didn’t say, it’s with obvious intent. JS…
the decision seems correct in the abstract and doesn’t represent a departure. but it’s a roadmap for presidents to avoid responsibility for impeding transfer of power in elections.
SCOTUS gives significant guidance to the trial court in what it should count as official acts, and it says that asking DOJ to investigate election fraud, even to “discuss” with the VP (Pence) what to do about certification of the election, talking to constituents about the election… none of it seems controversial and seems like common sense (of course anything relating to a federal election is related to executive power, and the executive can ask DOJ to launch investigations, right?) but the problem is that it implies good faith which Trump never showed. the deiciosn takes a hugely expansive view of official acts and how related to it actions must be to be shielded (not very much).
with this decision, the POTUS can indefinitely delay transfer of power, all they have to do is launch investigations, say that transfer of power must await that and then “discuss” (ie pressure, threaten with prosecution) officials involved in the election process. it came out after the Trump presidency that he wanted to do all sorts of messed up things like martial law etc… and was talked out of it by lawyers saying it’s illegal and he could get prosecuted. Well, that isn’t there anymore.
Why wouldn’t Biden, if Trump wins the election, say that the election had irregularities, that Trump supporters under the guise of ensuring compliance at polls instead pressured voters etc…, force DOJ to start and slow walk an investigation into this, and simply refuse to cede power under the guise that doing so is necessary to secure the vote, then talk Harris into doing what Trump couldn’t get Pence to do?
one thing you realize from looking at the actual rules of voting is how much of the system depends on people doing the right thing and acting in good faith, not abusing the power to investigate and delay indefinitely. this is an issue at local level with electors having the right to ensure vote is accurate and irregularities, well, they can just in bad faith claim they are investigating and just delay and delay. probably would take court action to try to force them to vote but that also will delay everything.
“Why wouldn’t Biden, if Trump wins the election, say that the election had irregularities, that Trump supporters under the guise of ensuring compliance at polls instead pressured voters etc…, force DOJ to start and slow walk an investigation into this, and simply refuse to cede power under the guise that doing so is necessary to secure the vote, then talk Harris into doing what Trump couldn’t get Pence to do?”
I believe the suggestion is ridiculous
But who knows maybe Biden would be stupid enough to try what Trump didn’t.
Start there.
I don’t think Biden will do this, and don’t want him to. I’m making the rhetorical point that he, or any POTUS running for reelection, could do this. Trump went a long way to do what I am suggesting, and it failed because people (Barr– who if he was acting in bad faith could have dragged out the investigation for ears, Ratzneburger) did the right thing. I also recall it was later revealed that advisors suggested a whole host of even more nefarious options like martial law and Trump considered some of these but didn’t do it because his lawyers raised potential criminal liability.
Long time reader, first time leaving a commit.
“Democrats purposely timed all these cases to coincide with the election.”
Whatever happened to your critical thinking skills? I expected so much better. Care to explain why Bannon went to prison yesterday? Care to recall how the majority of witnesses refused to testify? How about getting evidence submitted results in non stop legal battles?
Might want to check your bias and allow facts enter the image you paint.
Please explain why Georgia did not pursue a case against Trump in 2021 or 2022.
“On August 14, 2023, a grand jury convened by District Attorney Fani Willis in Fulton County, Georgia, indicted former President Donald Trump and 18 of his allies on violations of 16 Georgia statutes.”
Your apology is accepted, now make it.
Are you serious Mike? Did the evidence required to display infront of a grand jury fall out of the sky on Aug 14,2023? How long do you think it took to gather, how many refused to testify.
You never heard the saying the wheels of justice turn slow? You seriously believe they didn’t need evidence and witnesses and build a rico case prior to Aug 2023? Jeez you might need those performance enchacing drugs.
Georgia Has a Very Strong Case Against Trump Jan 21, 2022
Jan 21, 2022
Your using the Atlantic as your legal source! LoL,,,,Go back to school and acquire skills to present proper evidence.
I hope pundits start bringing up whether or not police officers and other government employees should have any immunity, and under what circumstances given all the focus on governmental immunity and whether or not anyone is above the law.
While I support Trump, he’s wrong about giving police immunity from their actions that harm others, as a lot of corrupt police use their power to commit crimes including setting up people for crimes they didn’t commit, they engage in unnecessary force harming people, they’ve destroyed innocent’s property (including their homes) in the pursuit of criminals committing minor offenses, they’ve killed innocent people from no-knock SWAT raids on the wrong homes, they’ve engaged in uncivil civil asset forfeiture, and policing for profit.
Just like for Trump, immunity is qualified when they’re correctly doing their jobs enforcing the law and the harm they cause to innocents is inadvertent.
To me, the real issue is the increased politicization of the US justice system right up to SCOTUS (and of course includes the very political hush money trial). By stating that a President is immune for many acts as long as they are constitutional simply increases the power of SCOTUS (the arbiters of what is constitutional). Amazed that the US is allowing itself down this path. You should be more aware of your slide on the democratic index ratings. This is for your own sake as well as the example you set for the rest of the world.
I disagree Jon. It’s always been the job of our justice system, including the SCOTUS, to interpret the law/Constitution, including whether or not a government agency of official’s actions are constitutional or not. Politicization is a symptom of too much government control (which is a problem), and the bigger problem is the uncivil weaponization of the government for partisan purposes (after which there’s no stopping the government from its overreach such as it’s excessive control of commerce which makes the political class rich and the rest of us poorer).
I agree that the US is sliding down on “the democratic index ratings” and the “increased politicization” (of everything, not just of the justice system). That’s simply an indicator of our government’s corruption and the increased governmental control over us and our work. We’ve been moving from free markets to government controlled markets, and that makes us poorer and more politicized.
We should be proud, we have the best government money can buy.
The way I read it, any official acts are immune from prosecution.
Then you can’t read.
Star over and if you still don’t get it, I suggest reading comprehension lessons.
Official acts that are constitutional are immune. It needs to be both to be immune.
The court even cited an example of an official act that was not constitutional in the Truman case.
Biden and Mitch McConnell might be suffering from Lewy Body Dementia. LBDA symptoms:
1) reduce facial expression, frozen face. 2) soft voice. 3) stiffness 4) postural
instability 5) Gait difficulties, fall. 6) slowness of movements….7) nueropsychiatric symptoms..9) difficulties with complex mental activities…
Bus drivers, engineers, or business executives should find a different occupation.
As I have said before … Trump will never see a day in prison … because this is all nothing more than World Wrestling Federation fakery … it’s entertainment… ya’ll are being played… Trump and Biden are nothing more than actors
https://fasteddynz.substack.com/p/what-if
If Biden is as f789ed up as he appears to be at times (does what is wrong with him switch on and off??? does he only sometimes shake hands with ghosts???) do you not think the Democrats would not have replaced him long ago?????
What – is he so powerful that he can tell them he is running no matter how f789ed up he is???? Are the Dems stupid… or perhaps loyal to Joe? Poor ol Joe… he’s f789ed but let’s let him run again anyway
Seriously…if he was demented they’d kick the old bastard down the stairs and drop a competent replacement in there without a second thought.
Unreal. Or maybe not given most people shot the Death Shot…. ya’ll just believe whatever cnnbbc tells you … no questions asked
Why would the power drunk leftists in the Biden camp discard their puppet?
Once you figure that one out, you will understand why they wouldn’t want to toss him until the last possible moment or even longer, if they figure out a path to victory with it.
Cuz they have plenty of other leftist puppets who would be more than happy to fill the role?
Or maybe because it does not matter who is POTUS… they are all puppets … including Trump?
And this is all entertainment … Hulk Hogan vs Andre the Giant… Trump blowhard vs Biden to doddering idiot… a cage match of imbeciles…
To distract ya’ll from the fact that politicians have ZERO real power… to keep you from looking behind the curtain where the real power resides…
And you never look because you are enthralled with this insane spectacle….to geriatric imbeciles debating hahahahaha….
This is absolutely brilliant stuff… you vote in one lot of idiots… when you have had enough you vote for another lot… nothing changes… the swamp does not get drained… rinse repeat…
There is NO democracy… do you really think the owners of the Fed would allow people like you who are so easily played… to influence decisions????
Are you out of your f789ing mind?
https://fasteddynz.substack.com/p/who-runs-the-world
Biden and his family will NEVER withdraw. They need him in office so that if and when the Biden Crime Family gets charged, he can pardon them all. He will never quit no matter how much damage it does to his party or his country.
2 things accomplished. They punted it back to the lower court making sure the clock was gonna run out.
The other thing? It lit a torch under people’s wahzoo to get out and vote.
Good thing Trump will be back in office to keep/expand the conservative majority.
Yes, lets get rid of the Electoral College and all the extra congressman that go with it. Then AOC will have to compete with 27 other former congressman to keep her house seat. This would flush out so many including the wack jobs on the squad.
Firing over 380 congressman would be a great way to start draining the swamp.
They don’t read the Constitution.
They don’t read the Transcripts (of the call with Zelenskyy).
They don’t read the Mueller Report. They don’t read the Durham Report.
They don’t read the Transcript of the Devon Archer interview.
They don’t read Jack Smith’s 37-count Mar-A-Lago Indictment or his Indictment for trying to overthrow the US government.
They don’t read Robert Hur’s Special Counsel Report. They don’t read the 98-page Georgia Indictment.
I’m not convinced they even read.
They don’t watch the January 6 Committee Investigative Hearings. They don’t watch Durham’s Congressional testimony.
They don’t care a bit what evidence Alvin Bragg and Letitia James might have.
They don’t look elsewhere to learn about the revelations from the Dominion lawsuit.
There’s absolutely no reason to believe that they have any awareness of the “alternate slate of electors” scam.
Instead, they line up and get empty talking points as though they were communion wafers at Church, and then they spend all day regurgitating them, safe in the knowledge that their fellow MAGA types will smile vapidly, and that they can dismiss the substantive corrections of others as “FAKE NEWS” or “RINOs.”
Right. Trump is a Russian spy. Biden is mentally as sharp as a tack.
Opps! I should have started reading at the bottom of your statement. Up ’til then I was sure you were discribing hard case liberals.
This ruling will save Biden’s hide one day (Assuming he is competent to stand trial)
Richard BlueMental intentionally ignores the fact SCOTUS rejected Trump’s request for absolute immunity and then tells a bold faced lie SCOTUS gave Trump a “license for authoritarianism.”
Surprised? Danang Dick also lied about serving in Vietnam.
Blumenthal — “at 20, you have the face that your parents gave you; at 40: the face that experience provided: at 60, you have the face you deserve”. A repulsive ghoul.
It is interesting to note that the left side of the bell curve is that representing the distribution of lower IQs.
But…But…Virtually Hitler…because…REASONS. /sarc
Will give it a try here.
This immunity ruling should be tied in with the J6 ruling about material interference required as Basis to be tried on obstruction.
I think what they are saying is aimed at qualifying a standard of actionable intent and proof thereof.
For instance Trump discusses with his VP Pence what happened during election vote count. He does this while still being President. That is he is acting as chief executive to ensure all Ballots are fairly counted. Even if that were to change the outcome in his favor, that is still well within his duties as President to conduct inquiry. That is not election interference nor was his intent any more then to check up the validity of the Presidential election, nor was it conducted outside his office.
Now the immunity decision would at surface be applied to the Mar a Lago event.
He was well within his rights as an ex president under the Presidential records act to be allowed to sort thru documents that came to his residence. No where does any evidence exist that his intent was to use any Classified documents for nefarious ends.
That the Case has been used for political purpose by Biden, Garland and Jack Smith, only the most partisan or complete fool would disavow.
Where is any Bar set for proving Bad intentions. Documents remained in Trumps possession. Were never offered out to a high bidder. Trump did as he was told to keep the disputed documents under lock and key. In short there was never any MATERIAL evidence such as improper handling or security breeches associated with Trump being in possession of classified documents. Any frictions he had were with the National Archives. So what is the Government case about? Jack Smith is supposed to prove that Trumps intent was in his head and Jack Smith knows what that intent was. Total BULL SHIT.
Unlike Senator Biden who kept classified documents in his home Garage next to his Corvette. Documents he was never entitled to have in his possession, let alone kept in such an unsecured place. Biden certainly never had the security clearances required to take those same documents out of where they were kept by Government.
Supreme Court apparently thinks there must be some material evidence required with proving intent. Otherwise the presumption of Immunity is granted to protect a former President from political persecution.
I have no idea if this is correct interpretation or not, but as previously mentioned the two rulings appear tied together at the Hip.
I agree ,basically the technical holding is uncontroversial (of course public officials should not be ruined for official acts). the issue is the guidance given by the SC to lower courts whereby everything a POTUS does connected to a federal election is related to official acts, like communicating with the VP, launching investigations into supposed irregularities. Take all this together, threatening to investigate and prosecute an official for not finding the correct votes is of course related to official acts of the executive branch of which POTIS is the head. Prosecutors make threats of prosecution to get admissions etc… it’s wha they do.
also bad is what SC said about what evidence should be allowed in: it said the trial court should be careful not to admit official acts as evidence when prosecurting a POTUS for unofficial acts. How practically is that spaghetti going to be untangled in a case where the overarching scheme is to subvert an election through bad faith claims of voter fraud, investigations etc?
There is a difference between a rubber Turd which looks like the real thing and the real thing which actually does smell.
To date all the DOJ, Biden, Jack Smith and the rest of the bunch of real Turds
posing as prosecutors have come up with are rubber Turds to go after Trump.
Another way to put it is the cases that were created to prosecute a former president were on the shakiest ground to start with.
When you have to resurrect an expired misdemeanor and turn it into a felony people other then a partisan with TDS would be skeptical.
When you have to raid a former Presidents Home in Florida even to point of going through his Wifes’ wardrobe when he was in compliance with what had been asked of him by National Archives people other then a partisan with TDS would be skeptical.
SC introduced rules of evidence requirements into the Matrix that is legal system dealing at Presidential level.
They also said innocent until proven guilty applies to a President as well as everyone else to address the Politicization of the Legal system.
“Hyperventilation by the Left”
What else would you expect them to do? The leadership on the left have to do this to placate to thier base who all loath Trump. The base acts as they are directed.
If a Democrat had received the same ruling there would be “hyperventilating” by the Right as well.
It’s all a show to keep the masses agitated, afraid, and clamoring for some shithead politician to save them.
There is a bill in Congress that would strip Trump of his Secret Service protection if he is sentenced to prison. If it passes, and the NY judge sends him to Rikers Island, then Trump would be left all alone and probably get shanked. RFK Jr. has been denied Secret Service protection, even after a man with a fake US Marshal badge was arrested for carrying a concealed weapon at a campaign rally. The Democrats aren’t just thinking about murder, they are actively trying to encourage and facilitate it. More on this is at ensign dot substack dot com, read “The Democrats have made a plan for Trump to be killed in prison“.
The dictators wouldn’t dare eliminating Trump before the Nov election. If elected can he be sworn by an official gov notary. Should he transfer power to his vp or rule this country form upstate Clinton jail, without his nuke button, impaired. Can he gain his freedom and rule from Mar Largo.
Are you in the Looney Bin?
Opps, I meant to say you are in the looney bin!
The odds of such a bill even passing is precisely 0.0%. If it did Trump would veto it.
Second, If the judge was stupid enough to sentence trump to jail, it would immediately be put on hold, the case reviewed, and thrown out.
If I’m ‘in the looney bin’ for mentioning that House Resolution 8081 exists, then Congress must be the national version of Arkham Asylum, and Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), the former chairman of the House Jan. 6 select committee, must be the Joker, because this is an actual proposed Act of Congress: https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/8081/text .
I agree that it’s not likely to pass, but the fact that it exists at all speaks volumes about how far the Democrats are willing to go to keep their grip on power.
Did you mean to write “Biden would veto it” instead of Trump would veto it? Hunter Biden is more likely to actually need Secret Service protection in prison than Trump.
I don’t think that it is crazy at all to point out to voters that this bill is real, and it has eight co-sponsors. If one of these people or Thompson is your Representative, then you might want to think twice about re-electing them:
Rep. Carter, Troy A. [D-LA-2]*
Rep. Lee, Barbara [D-CA-12]*
Rep. Wilson, Frederica S. [D-FL-24]*
Rep. Clarke, Yvette D. [D-NY-9]*
Rep. Watson Coleman, Bonnie [D-NJ-12]*
Rep. Crockett, Jasmine [D-TX-30]*
Rep. Beatty, Joyce [D-OH-3]*
Rep. Cohen, Steve [D-TN-9]*
Are we not supposed to be curbing the Links? Especially to the one that suggested it…
The direct links to the text of the bill and to Representatives are all from the official “.gov” Congressional website.
Which shows you exactly how much this was all a “Show Trial” with the pure goal of click bait, ideological manipulation and pure propaganda. With the hope that something, or anything sticks…
“Official Act,” what does that mean? What makes an act official? I think to the layman and official act is an action or decision that clearly pertains to a President’s official responsibilities. Who the President is talking with or what building he is in when having a particular discussion should not be the litmus test of whether such conversation or decision constitutes an official act. The subject matter and intent should be the determining factors.
The SC ruling specifically says that motive cannot be used to determine official/unofficial by a court. Only the circumstances surrounding the act.
The constitution defines the official duties of the president.
Please re-read my post because it is clear you didn’t.
The official duties of the president is now whatever the president thinks are the official duties. Trump said “everything I did was official duties.” Only question now is will Joe be able to head this off before it is too late.
They can all be official duties.
But they can’t all be constitutional ones because those are clearly spelled out and not subject to the whims of the president.
Official duties that are constitutional are protected from prosecution. Official duties are not.
I did read your piece. I am still very unclear what determines whether an “act” made in the Oval Office, including one or more cabinet members or senior advisors is an official act of the President or not. My question relates to what hat the President is where at the time, the President hat, the private citizen hat or the candidate hat. January 6th for example, I think that it is clear that the Donald Trump was not conducting himself as the President of the United States when continuing to deny the results of the election after the Department of Justice, the courts, and the state Attorney Generals all rejected the fraud claims. It is ludicrous to contend that his actions after all legal avenues where exhausted regarding his fraud claims where official acts of the President of the United States. But it is clear that his persistence to keep denying the results of the election, condoning his private citizen allies attempts of create fake electors, and his strong arming of the VP to send the official elector votes back to the states instead of certifying them in his role as the President of the Senate were not official acts of the President, they were the actions of a candidate and private citizen. My understanding of today’s rulings appear to broadly define official acts of the President, not a nuanced one.
I think that it is very easy to establish that questioning the validity of a national election (rightly or wrongly, self-serving or not) is one of the things that a President would want to concern himself with as part of his official duties. I, being a lunatic, would go so far as to forgive a president who, in light of an obviously rigged election, used the military to remain in power until an election that passed the sniff test (minimal mail-in justifications) could be conducted.
The President has all of the power of the Executive Branch of Government to bring to bear to investigate and litigate when appropriate the results of an election and that certainly would be an official act of a President under certain circumstances. Furthermore, a candidate who is a sitting President can hire non-government lawyers and investigators to exhaust the options that are allowed in terms of challenging an election result. President and candidate Trump availed himself of both avenues. His DOJ concluded after looking into allegations of fraud that there was no evidence of material enough fraud to change the election result. Candidate Trump had private attorneys look into fraud allegations in various states and take what they found to the court system where each of those cases were tossed out for lack of sufficient evidence. So, both President Trump and candidate Trump exhausted the legitimate legal avenues available to investigate and litigate allegations of fraud. However, private citizen Trump continued to publicly use his position as President to sow suspicion that the election was stolen going as far as endorsing a scheme cooked up by a number of his non-government advisors and “friends” to have the VP deny certification of the legitimate state elector votes in Congress while at the same time recruiting illegitimate electors to replace the legitimate electors when the VP refused to certify the legitimate electors. Nothing beyond leveraging Federal Law Enforcement and the DOJ to look into incidents of fraud is within a President’s official acts. What he had the campaign do is not an act of the President, it is an act of a candidate, no different then if an sitting President candidate did the same.
Our Justice system has proven completely inept at handling a rule breaker like Trump. He literally told a state to find him votes, the exact number he needed to win, and threatened to use the power of government prosecution against the state official if he did not capitulate. And there won’t even be a trial before the next election. If he wins there will be a lot of bad things that happen. A lot. He will have no fear of consequences. By the time his is out of office he’ll be almost dead anyway. The man has nothing to lose, nothing.
Steve That is complete bullshit.
Please read my post, point by point, and tell me how it lets Trump do whatever he wants.
You can’t.
As for Georgia, I actually think there was a strong case against Trump.
But who set the timing?
Who made a shitshow out of the prosecution other than Fanni Willis?
“No one is above the law.” Simple, easy to understand, easy to implement. No more. Joe has seven months left in his presidency. The next president could officially and legally execute anyone he/she wants. If I were Joe, I’d start thinking about life after January.
“The next president could officially and legally execute anyone he/she wants.”
It must be hard living with such a reading comprehension problem. Don’t worry though. There are plenty of ‘tards out there living really kickass lives. My first wife was ‘tarded. She’s a pilot now.
Theres no comprehension prob. Perhaps you may be a little scared of the can of worms that was opened today. Trump has already said everything he did was “official business.” And when he returns in January, to defend the Constitution and the Republic from all enemies, foreign and domestic, we’ll get to see what he’ll get to do now … officially and legally.
Ok, right. Trump will never catch up with the Clintons’ body count, which has been racked up since before this USSC ruling you’ve purposely or ‘tardedly misinterpreted. But yeah, let’s claim POTUS can now just start executing people, and it will all be legal, and all 300+ million of us will just be OK with that. So how long has Trump lived rent-free inside your head? Have you thought about medication?
1930s millions of people got pushed to the side as darkness hit Germany. Within 6 years everyone had been replaced by a brownshirt. It can happen very fast. And you can kiss all your blogs goodbye.
It was already established that the President can execute US citizens unilaterally when Obama ordered a drone strike against a US citizen and escaped charges after leaving office. It’s OK when your side does it though I suppose. Except your side actually did it, you’re now only hypothesizing some future President from the politiball tem you don’t like will do it.
If Obama did it I dont see why you’d be against it. Only question is does Joe have what it takes to strike first.
In Chicago 50 – 60 years ago on election night the Chicago/Crook County Dems would have some minions (or George Dunne, who was 10x smarter than old man Daley) on tv with Len O’Connor, Mike Royco, Walter Jacobson, etc. This was back when the suburbs and collar counties were majority team R, and ‘downstate’ even more so. Around 10 pm the Ds would say Mayor Daley was ‘holding back’ the (D) votes until all of opposition came in. He didn’t want to unwittingly outdo Brezhnev.
When Trump/Biden debate was over the progressive media cannibalized each other.
SCOTUS : Trump is immune from prosecution until Brutus stabbed him in the back.
Pelosi: “The ruling dangerously holds that official acts are inadmissible in trials for unofficial acts, giving the defendant a political gift.“
Dangerous, until it applies to corrupt Democrat. Then she will be fine with it. Pelosi should already have called for Biden’s impeachment, if she believed no one is above the law.
So, why doesn’t the same ruling apply to Judges and Prosecutors?
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/rule-of-law/supreme-court-rules-on-trumps-immunity/
Pelosi was soused after the debate.
If the President orders the murder of his domestic opponents, AND it comes before the court before it happens, the court can rule that no you are not allowed to do that because it’s unconstitutional. But if the murder occurs he cannot be prosecuted for it, and of course the murder cannot be undone.
That’s been settled law ever since Obama assassinated a US citizen with a drone strike and wasn’t charged. Some of you even called him a hero.
They’re just trying to deflect from the narrative about Bidens bad debate performance. They will do and say anything to make Trump look bad to the voters.
“Hyperventilation by the left was intense in all corners including Senator Richard Blumenthal, former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and many others.”
Did they hyperventilate when Hillary was not charged after FBI Comey laid out the criminal case against her? What’s that Democrat false claim again, that no one is above the law?
If they spent 1/10th of the amount of energy trying to eliminate Trump, we might see some improvements occur.
OH, MY, I inferred that they can THINK. SORRY, I retract that statement.
The fact that the break down of so many decisions seems to be ‘split along ideological lines’ should tell you what a farce the legal system is.
You do realize that it’s always been this way? It’s not a farce, just a human system with all the flaws that entails. Still seems to be better than all historically tested alternatives.
The deranged left can go pound sand. Pelosi will be hitting the vodka again hard, that’s for sure. But common sense and the rule of law prevailed here, thankfully.
And quid pro is the best walking/talking campaign ad for Trump we could ever ask for. It’s been a very good week or so for Trump.
I just had a few drinks to try to understand Pelosi a little better.
I think Pelosi meant to say official political acts that are dangerous to hold in trials that are a gift to the ruling acts are unofficial and inadmissible.
The Supreme Court’s decision is straightforward — he is immune from prosecution for official acts but not unofficial ones. If you want to go wild over this, it is your choice but it is irrational.
No. The President is NOT immune from Official Acts if they are NOT Constitutional. Didn’t you understand the Truman reference?
It was an “Official Act” to grab the Steel Plants but NOT Constitutional. Thus it was Illegal.
Was that President prosecuted criminally? You folks aren’t very bright.
The SC immediately told Truman no.
Desperate people do desperate things. In this case a group of immoral people determined to have absolute control of everyone outside their clique are seeing their goals smashed!
Trump and his criminal cohorts are as immoral as can be. Lying and cheating on nearly everyone and everything he can to line his own pockets or grab power.
No, the Dems Leadership and Trump / Republicans are both dirty and immoral.
As an Independent this entire election is a poop show.
Get BETTER Republicans!
Get BETTER Democrats!
Term Limits and Campaign Finance Reform are needed NOW!
All you people who have been telling us for the past five years that Biden is just fine have a lot of nerve calling anyone else a liar today. You’ve perpetrated the biggest fraud on the American public in history.
So what did Biden do because he of his condition that you think has done great harm?
Aside from ginning up an unnecessary proxy war with the country with the most nuclear weapons – most of which are aimed at us?
Don’t forget intentionally allowing the invasion of our country by illegals dependent on the government.
I don’t believe has been in charge of anything as President. Only a fool could believe that after last week.
What we need is Better Reporting. No other “fix’ will work.
“Democrats purposely timed all these cases to coincide with the election.” Ok, that’s just dumb. Trump filed this case with the supreme court. He controlled the timing. The underlying cases that give rise to it have been delayed for one reason or another and now likely lie beyond 2028 and will have limited impact.
As far as the logic of the decision, I can’t opine yet. In principal, I agree but the examples in the opinion give me some pause. It does not seem logical that the President could intentionally commit a flagrant foul but face no repercussions – impeachment isn’t much of a deterrent, and at least half the time a complete non-threat. Easy to envision a President who commits bad acts and a congress that chooses to support it. We’ve been there recently.
“Trump filed this case with the supreme court.”
Trump filed a case against himself?
Sotomayor seemed pretty clear. Mark July 1st, the day when the USA became the Kingdom of the United States (KUS).
Soto is not a biologist
And you arent on the Supreme Court
She’s still a dolt.
Most of the other Supreme Court Justices think she’s wrong too.
My goodness, how did you get that little bit of truth thru the algorithms?????? 🙂
Watching all the heads explode this past week has been a nice early fireworks show. Happy 4th everyone!