Assassination Of Rivals Covered By Presidential Immunity

Trump could eat a child live on TV and some of you guys would come up with an excuse for it.

Any politician threatening the use of violence on another political rival should be removed and never allowed in office again.

If a president having seal team six assassinated his political opponents should not be covered by presidential immunity;

What should happen to a president who has his DOJ politicaly persecute his political opponents?

a reply to: Kurokage

The Trump crowd has proven themselves loyal to Trump no matter what. The excuses I see from them for his behavior is impressive if I'm being honest.

originally posted by: Dandandat3
If a president having seal team six assassinated his political opponents should not be covered by presidential immunity;

What should happen to a president who has his DOJ politicaly persecute his political opponents?

Some of us agree Teump and his lawyers are laying the groundwork for evidence that has yet to be allowed in court.

And democrats always accuse their opponents of what they are guilty of and attempting to hide.
That said,
Seal team six being used made me instantly think of Benghazi, Osama assassination and Hillary and Obama.
But I could not tie that Into an assassination of a political opponent.
For that I had to go back in history to Reagan and the Kennedy assassinations.

What was the unclassified documents Trump had secured at Mara Lago really about?

This just keeps getting more interesting

a reply to: steve90210

With a little context here, Trump was giving a serious interview by a friendly pundit when he said he would be a dictator on day one. Obama's ''joke'' was a completely different context. He was being goaded by a late night comic host and his comment about a ''third term'' was in line with the comics need to present comedy for it's viewers.

At least that is the only time I know of that Obama mentioned holding a third term. Do you have any other examples of his stating his desire for a third term?

originally posted by: FarmerSimulation

originally posted by: Dandandat3
If a president having seal team six assassinated his political opponents should not be covered by presidential immunity;

What should happen to a president who has his DOJ politicaly persecute his political opponents?

Some of us agree Teump and his lawyers are laying the groundwork for evidence that has yet to be allowed in court.

Interesting how that "it's coming" evidence never materializes.

originally posted by: steve90210
Like Obama's being okay with a third term! Now I get it! Or Trump's dictatorship - but only on his first day. He's totally joking!? Just like Obama was!? Or is Obama telling truth/a true mastermind evil manipulator and Trump just joking about being an American dictator, because... funny... in an election year when people are talking about making target lists and retribution and militias and civil war? Hilarious stuff.

a reply to: network dude

It's cool, I always ignore things that go against my bias too.

originally posted by: Kurokage
Trump could eat a child live on TV and some of you guys would come up with an excuse for it.

Any politician threatening the use of violence on another political rival should be removed and never allowed in office again.

I agree. Now who has done this horrible thing?

originally posted by: Kurokage
Trump could eat a child live on TV and some of you guys would come up with an excuse for it.

Any politician threatening the use of violence on another political rival should be removed and never allowed in office again.

I specifically remember Biden threatening to kick Trump's ass.

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: Kurokage
Trump could eat a child live on TV and some of you guys would come up with an excuse for it.

Any politician threatening the use of violence on another political rival should be removed and never allowed in office again.

I agree. Now who has done this horrible thing?

Allegedly there's a video somewhere of Hillary and Huma Abedin eating a young girl...

originally posted by: watchitburn

originally posted by: Kurokage
Trump could eat a child live on TV and some of you guys would come up with an excuse for it.

Any politician threatening the use of violence on another political rival should be removed and never allowed in office again.

I specifically remember Biden threatening to kick Trump's ass.

wasn't Joetatoe going to take him behind the woodshed? Not sure what goes on back there, but it sounded ominous.

a reply to: RiversRainman

His lawyers did not bring this up. Just like they put his name in the Epstein leak saying he was mentioned in the headlines but burying that the mention was he was not there.

Stop reading headlines and actually read 3 or 4 articles about the same issue.

Read the same article from

HuffPo
WaPo
Breitbart
NYTimes

If you read all 4 you will find some truth.

originally posted by: watchitburn
a reply to: RiversRainman

The Commie judge brought it up. Not Trump's lawyers.

And depending on the situation it can fall within the law.

Say a judge signs off on an arrest warrant to arrest Biden for treason.

He resists and gets killed in the process.

Perfectly legal.

Sure, but if a judge signs off on a valid arrest warrant that's because it went through due process, including a Grand Jury. The Judicial Branch--as you may remember from High School Civics class--is a separate branch from the Executive. Trump and his attorneys did not mention judges and due process anywhere in their argument. You just tossed that in there as a non sequitur, for some reason. Trump's team is arguing that whoever the POTUS is at any given time can do anything they want to without regard to due process. They don't need no stinking judges.

originally posted by: watchitburn

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: Kurokage
Trump could eat a child live on TV and some of you guys would come up with an excuse for it.

Any politician threatening the use of violence on another political rival should be removed and never allowed in office again.

I agree. Now who has done this horrible thing?

Allegedly there's a video somewhere of Hillary and Huma Abedin eating a young girl...

It’s titled frazzledrip. They cut her face off and eat it while she’s still alive.

a reply to: Boomer1947

now you are getting it. It's exactly like that. Otherwise, Obama could be prosecuted for ordering a drone strike on an American Citizen. As long as he has Presidential immunity, he can't be charged. I knew with baby steps we could bring you to understand all this.

a reply to: RiversRainman

First, the judge brought the argument, not Trumps team.

Second, it's logical. Otherwise there is one branch of government above another.

Thus the impeachment process.

This is the problem in our country. The drastic inability to think logically, from beginning to end, of a hypothetical question and all of the tangential impacts it may have.

a reply to: JinMI

this is why the left keep shooting themselves in the foot. They can't think through a process to save their lives. It's all "OMG! we must stop Trump from nuking the universe!", and no thought into how stupid they will look when he has another 4 years of prosperity and no new wars.

So the left are creating these crimes to apply at will. Is that OK?

It was impossible for Jan 6 to lead to an insurrection, but that doesn’t stop the left. It was also impossible for Trump to change votes in GA, or stop the new administration from taking over.

These were impossible events that the left decided to say were crimes.

a reply to: network dude

We can actually see it applied currently and historically by the Executive Order.

POTUS prints it, it is then enacted without any other branches approval or insight.

Only then is it up for litigation and scrutiny.


How many EO's have been ruled unconstitutional long after an EO?

Yet there is no culpability, even for the great harm it may have done to the American people.

originally posted by: Xtrozero
So the left are creating these crimes to apply at will. Is that OK?

It was impossible for Jan 6 to lead to an insurrection, but that doesn’t stop the left. It was also impossible for Trump to change votes in GA, or stop the new administration from taking over.

These were impossible events that the left decided to say were crimes.

I thought it was a good question from the judge.

The worst possible thing in her mind that a president could do (lets dismiss the irony for now )

Even then, as Trumps lawyer responded, we've already been operating under a system that allows for that for 250 years.