S.C. Jack Smith Asks the Supreme Court if US Presidents are Immune from Prosecution.

originally posted by: WeMustCare
Many media outlets have apparently laid off the smartest (highest paid) reporters. They are giving the impression that DONALD TRUMP asked the Supreme Court to rule on if he can/can-not be held liable for (alleged) crimes committed while in office.

IT WAS Special Counsel JACK SMITH who asked the Supreme Court to rule on this, back in December 2023.

Mr. Trump and his Lawyers have mentioned Numerous Times that he should not be Tried for an alleged Offense he was Already found innocent of by the U.S. Senate . It's Called Double Jeopardy , and it is Legally Sound .

a reply to: WeMustCare

Not quite right. Trump appealed Chutkan's ruling that he didn't have immunity. Smith then petitioned SCOTUS to grant an emergency cert at that point in an attempt to leapfrog the DC Circuit.

The fact that SCOTUS decided to grant cert at this point, while upholding the stay, raises some questions.

DC Circuit's ruling was near bulletproof. Trump's filing didn't meet the criteria for cert, let alone a stay.

So if this case is important enough that SCOTUS needs to hear it regardless of the defendants lack of an argument, why didn't they grant cert when Smith asked for it in December?

a reply to: Threadbarer

If SCOTUS is not hearing arguments on April 22nd because Jack Smith asked them to back in mid-December, what request caused them to say today that they will take on this case?

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit

originally posted by: WeMustCare
Many media outlets have apparently laid off the smartest (highest paid) reporters. They are giving the impression that DONALD TRUMP asked the Supreme Court to rule on if he can/can-not be held liable for (alleged) crimes committed while in office.

IT WAS Special Counsel JACK SMITH who asked the Supreme Court to rule on this, back in December 2023.

Mr. Trump and his Lawyers have mentioned Numerous Times that he should not be Tried for an alleged Offense he was Already found innocent of by the U.S. Senate . It's Called Double Jeopardy , and it is Legally Sound .

I don't know if the Supreme Court is taking this "double jeopardy" argument into consideration, or if they are broadly looking at if a former President can be tried, based on what he did as President.

a reply to: WeMustCare

Following the DC Circuit court's ruling, Trump filed a motion with SCOTUS asking for the stay to remain in place until SCOTUS ruled on the matter. Smith's reply argued why a stay was not warranted but also asked the court, if Trump's motion was granted, to also consider it a petition for cert.

a reply to: WeMustCare

No it isn't. Congress is not a law enforcement body.

originally posted by: Threadbarer
a reply to: WeMustCare

No it isn't. Congress is not a law enforcement body.

What? I didn't mention congress. Like my car always tells me, I'm saying to you, "Time to take a break!"

a reply to: WeMustCare

The argument is that because he was impeached by Congress it weighed bre double jeopardy to charge him with this crime. But Congress is not a law enforcement body, ergo, no double jeopardy.

a reply to: WeMustCare

If the CEO of a Company you Work for makes some , to You Personally , Questionable Decisions , is it then somehow your Right to Demand he be Fired as his Subordinate ? No . With his Authority it is His Right to Decide Things concerning the Company's Business , because that is what he is being Paid for to do . Mr. Trump was Elected POTUS , and with that Office of Authority he Made Decisions he thought were the Right Ones . Who is to Question that or Find Criminal Fault in it ? Answer , No One .....

originally posted by: Threadbarer
a reply to: WeMustCare

The argument is that because he was impeached by Congress it weighed bre double jeopardy to charge him with this crime. But Congress is not a law enforcement body, ergo, no double jeopardy.

It was the Senate , Not Congress . There goes your Whole BS Point.......

a reply to: Zanti Misfit

The Senate is part of Congress. I'm guessing you didn't pass Civics in school.

a reply to: Threadbarer

No, it was the Senate. The House sent it up. So you could part hairs if you wanted to but that is like pointing out misspellings in an argument you know you are looseing.

A 'real' Senate Committee, the DOJ and the FBI all said there was no insurrection. All of them. Who else should be believe?

a reply to: matafuchs

Once again Congress, that's the House of Representatives and Senate, is not a law enforcement body. Therefore the double jeopardy argument is moot.

a reply to: Threadbarer

I didn't say that. I am saying that 3 separate entities which are the highest investigative bodies in the US found nothing but Jack Smith has the magic bullet?

No. He does not. This is about making sure Trump is hindered in his running for POTUS. A direct weaponization of the Federal and multiple state governments.

originally posted by: Threadbarer
a reply to: Zanti Misfit

The Senate is part of Congress. I'm guessing you didn't pass Civics in school.

but nobody made that argument but you. Would you like to make up more stuff that nobody said, or are you good now?

a reply to: matafuchs

The discussion that was being had that you jumped into was whether or not double jeopardy triggers because of the impeachment. It doesn't.

At the end of the day it doesn't matter what I think Smith has, or what you think he has, or even what he thinks he has. What matters is what the grand jury thinks he has. And they think he has enough evidence that a crime was committed that they issued an indictment.

And now it matters what the 12 members of the trial jury think he has.

a reply to: network dude

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit

originally posted by: WeMustCare
Many media outlets have apparently laid off the smartest (highest paid) reporters. They are giving the impression that DONALD TRUMP asked the Supreme Court to rule on if he can/can-not be held liable for (alleged) crimes committed while in office.

IT WAS Special Counsel JACK SMITH who asked the Supreme Court to rule on this, back in December 2023.

Mr. Trump and his Lawyers have mentioned Numerous Times that he should not be Tried for an alleged Offense he was Already found innocent of by the U.S. Senate . It's Called Double Jeopardy , and it is Legally Sound .

It certainly seems like the first poster on this page and Trump's lawyers are making that argument.

a reply to: network dude

The, possibly simplistic, way that I understand it is that Congress is the accuser and the Senate is the judge.

Congress accused President Trump and determined, correctly or incorrectly, that there was enough evidence to go to trial like a DA, then in the “court” of the Senate he was found not guilty.

That’s how this foreigner understands it.

a reply to: Threadbarer

I know. I was pointing out it is a waste of tax payer dollars because there is nothing he would have that has already been reviewed.

This is like the cases in NY. NO ONE would touch them until they found someone dumb enough to push it to the limit and they sacrifice them.

I'll wait for the SCOTUS before I worry about 12 hand picked Never Trumpers.

a reply to: NorthOS

Just some clarification, as you don't live here.

The US legislative body is a bicameral legislature split into two houses, the House of Representatives and the Senate. Together they are known as the US Congress.

Impeachment is not a criminal trial. At the end of the day it is just the mechanism in place that allows Congress to remove members of the Executive Branch from office.

If someone is successfully removed from office via impeachment they don't go to jail and they don't get a criminal record. Functionally, it is no different than expulsion process that removed George Santos from office last year. There's just more steps.