D.C. Court of Appeals made a horrible ruling against Trump

I'm not the biggest Trump supporter, but Trump Derangement Syndrome is truly a problem. These guys hate President Trump so much they're willing to defy the Constitution and any law to get him.

Presidents have blanket immunity and they have this for a reason. The D.C. Court of Appeals said this though:

“For the purpose of this criminal case, former President Trump has become citizen Trump, with all of the defenses of any other criminal defendant,” the panel wrote in the 57-page opinion.
www.cnbc.com...

Trump was President on January 6th.

The line, "For the purpose of this case" is lawless and reckless. They have reduced Presidential immunity to a case by case basis. They said:

“We cannot accept that the office of the Presidency places its former occupants above the law for all time thereafter,” a three-judge panel wrote in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

Yes it does. That's what Presidential immunity is. You have blanket Presidential immunity to avoid a situation where Presidents aren't being Prosecuted for everything they did in office.

This would mean President Obama becomes Citizen Obama and he could be prosecuted for everything he did while in office. President Clinton is now Citizen Clinton and can be prosecuted for everything he did in office.

The D.C. Court knows this and this is why they said "For the purpose of this case." What they have just done is reduce Presidential immunity to a case by case basis.

If Republican Lawyers were smart, they would flood the courts with cases against Obama and Clinton based on this ruling and say each Court has to decide these things on a case by case basis based on the D.C. Court ruling.

Presidential immunity only covers actions taken in an official capacity. Trump's lawyers failed to sufficiently argue that his actions that culminated in the storming of Capitol were in an official capacity. As such, this case will be allowed to move forward.

Trump is more than allowed to make his arguments for Presidential immunity to the jury and let them decide whether or not he was covered.

a reply to: neoholographicpart2

wow, if Trump becomes president, and has his own DOJ, (and knowing that going after your political opponents is not only OK, it's the new normal) perhaps they would go after Obama for killing that American kid with a drone. Murder. I wonder if that's still a crime?

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: neoholographicpart2

wow, if Trump becomes president, and has his own DOJ, (and knowing that going after your political opponents is not only OK, it's the new normal) perhaps they would go after Obama for killing that American kid with a drone. Murder. I wonder if that's still a crime?

Yep, family members can go after George W. Bush if their child died in Iraq.

This will open the floodgates and each of these cases will have to be decided on a case by case basis per this ruling. This is why Presidents have blanket immunity or there could be thousands of cases brought against a President after they leave office for everything they did while in office.

a reply to: network dude

If he just woke up one day and said let's target that american kid with a drone, then sure charge him. If he was acting in the capacity of his position, then no. Kind of like when Trump had the DOJ investigate fraud. No problem. But when you cook up a scheme to have people break election laws, then yes.

I mean unless you want Presidents to be able to do what they want even if criminal and outside the duties of office? Not so sure that's what you should hope for.

a reply to: neoholographicpart2

Banana republic in a clown car careening to a collision with reality.

Cheers

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: network dude

If he just woke up one day and said let's target that american kid with a drone, then sure charge him. If he was acting in the capacity of his position, then no. Kind of like when Trump had the DOJ investigate fraud. No problem. But when you cook up a scheme to have people break election laws, then yes.

I mean unless you want Presidents to be able to do what they want even if criminal and outside the duties of office? Not so sure that's what you should hope for.

Oh sweetie, this isn't up to me. I'm just stating facts about this ruling. I actually was cheering for this outcome. Watching ya'll frantically trying to put the toothpaste back in the tube will make many smiles.

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: network dude

If he just woke up one day and said let's target that american kid with a drone, then sure charge him. If he was acting in the capacity of his position, then no. Kind of like when Trump had the DOJ investigate fraud. No problem. But when you cook up a scheme to have people break election laws, then yes.

I mean unless you want Presidents to be able to do what they want even if criminal and outside the duties of office? Not so sure that's what you should hope for.

This makes no sense.

President Clinton used triangulation with Dick Morris to go after his enemies. Dick Morris and others talked about how Clinton used his office to do these things.

When Obama had his beer summit backlash, this would mean those Police Officers can claim they were hurt by Obama's actions and sue him for damages.

The D.C. Court knows this and that's why they said "For this case." You can't reduce Presidential immunity to a case by case basis to get Trump. This means Obama, Clinton and Bush should face a gang of cases that will need to be decided on a case by case basis per this ruling.

a reply to: neoholographicpart2

did you factor in the "but Trump" defense?

a reply to: neoholographicpart2

If Biden hired a hitman and had Trump killed tomorrow, do you believe that Biden should be immune from prosecution?

a reply to: network dude

"Oh sweetie" why would I want to "put the toothpaste back in the tube"? If any President current or former is charged with a crime in a court of law, for a crime committed while President as it was outside his scope of office, then let it play out. No one is above the law.

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: neoholographicpart2

did you factor in the "but Trump" defense?

Exactly, they have Trump Derangement Syndrome.

originally posted by: frogs453
No one is above the law.

LOL, hold on to that. I think the long game will be much more enjoyable to watch now. But you got him!

originally posted by: Threadbarer
a reply to: neoholographicpart2

If Biden hired a hitman and had Trump killed tomorrow, do you believe that Biden should be immune from prosecution?

LOL, he'd never make it to being arrested. 75 million pissed off people would tear him into small shards.

a reply to: network dude

That didn't answer the question.

a reply to: network dude

Not sure why you always project your beliefs that a President cannot commit a crime onto me. That I will change my mind in the future. I believe they most certainly could if so inclined. I've been consistent with that belief. The difference is I don't worship a politician. So if charged with a crime, I won't weep and wail. It's really very simple, there are consequences when you commit a crime. It's quite easy to avoid doing so.

originally posted by: Threadbarer
a reply to: neoholographicpart2

If Biden hired a hitman and had Trump killed tomorrow, do you believe that Biden should be immune from prosecution?

First, you will never find out. That's why you have blanket immunity for Presidents.

For instance, there have been many suspicious deaths around Bill Clinton while he was in office.

The Clinton body count list draws ties to several suspicious deaths of the family’s allies and government officials. One of the most notable was the death of Vince Foster, former White House Counsel and colleague of Hillary at a Little Rock law firm. Foster’s death by a gunshot wound to the head was determined a suicide. Another death of longtime friend and business partner of the Clinton’s, James McDougal, raised eyebrows. McDougal suffered from a heart attack while in solitary confinement. When Ron Brown, Commerce Secretary, died in a random plane crash, theorists alleged that x-rays of Brown’s skull reveal bullet fragments. More tales follow similar formats, of those close to the Clintons dying in strange accidents. The timing of these accidents along with the vast and often veiled resources afforded to those in the executive branch makes it possible the Clintons were behind these events.

A smart Lawyer could bring a RICO case against Clinton and his administration say they used his office to commit and conceal these murders. You would have to get past the Presidential Records Act and all sorts of classified communications to gather evidence.

The reason you didn't see 10,000 cases against Clinton after he left office, is because of Presidential immunity. With this case, Republican attorney's can bring conspiracy to commit murder charges against Bill Clinton. I don't think this is the case, but this illustrates why you can't say in order to get Trump, I'm going to reduce Presidential immunity to just this case.

originally posted by: Threadbarer

Trump is more than allowed to make his arguments for Presidential immunity to the jury and let them decide whether or not he was covered.

That is how you think it works? Remember OJ was innocent in the eyes of the court. Bigfoot could also be proven real based on a jury in the eyes of the court .

a reply to: neoholographicpart2

but this illustrates why you can't say in order to get Trump, I'm going to reduce Presidential immunity to just this case.

They don’t care, as long as it gets Orange Man Bad.

I applaud you for trying but many others have tried and all have failed to get these hurt feelz cult members to understand facts.

Reversing the Liberal lobotomy is next to impossible.

a reply to: Xtrozero

Both Chutkan and the DC Circuit have found Trump's arguments to lack a Constitutional basis. If SCOTUS rules similarly, the Trump has two choices, drop the argument or attempt to convince the jury that he was covered by immunity.