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

originally posted by: JadedGhost
I don’t understand though, people here keep claiming there was no insurrection. So why would Trump be trying to claim presidential immunity, if there was no insurrection in the first place?

I think you are missing a timeline here... The left has been screaming insurrection and we just want to know how in the hell could that even play out. Why did they just leave at curfew too? How many congresspersons were taken hostage or killed? They had the numbers to do it if that was their goal, so why didn't they if that was their plan?

Was kind of stupid to not bring weapons in this insurrection and to walk around taking selfies... oh the horror...

Just like the Russian hoax where everything was made up, but boy they sure tried hard to still get him didn't they.

a reply to: JinMI

they wrote in their opinion that he is not held to the Double Jeopardy clause because of the impeachment which means...an impeachment means nothing?

These clowns are overstepping and just telling the same story with their latest 'opine'.

originally posted by: Threadbarer
a reply to: Lazy88

Investigators have failed to show any kind of intent. Biden didn't pack the documents and there's no indication he even knew they were on his possession.

Investigators of Joe Biden's National Security violations are not talking: hotair.com...

a reply to: matafuchs

Congress is neither a law enforcement entity nor the judiciary. The only punishment Congress can mete out is removal from office, at which point the DOJ can choose whether or not to press charges. In Trump's case, Congress chose not to remove him from office as he was already out of office.

So why should double jeopardy come into play when he was never charged in a court of law on these crimes before?

originally posted by: matafuchs
a reply to: JinMI

they wrote in their opinion that he is not held to the Double Jeopardy clause because of the impeachment which means...an impeachment means nothing?

These clowns are overstepping and just telling the same story with their latest 'opine'.

Ayup. Page 37:

The federal prosecution of a former President fits the case
“[w]hen judicial action is needed to serve broad public
interests” in order to “vindicate the public interest in an
ongoing criminal prosecution.” Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. at 754.
The risks of chilling Presidential action or permitting meritless,
harassing prosecutions are unlikely, unsupported by history
and “too remote and shadowy to shape the course of justice.”
See Clark, 289 U.S. at 16. We therefore conclude that
functional policy considerations rooted in the structure of our
government do not immunize former Presidents from federal
criminal prosecution.

How many impeachments and trials are needed to refute this wild attempt at a justification?

originally posted by: Threadbarer
a reply to: matafuchs

Congress is neither a law enforcement entity nor the judiciary. The only punishment Congress can mete out is removal from office, at which point the DOJ can choose whether or not to press charges. In Trump's case, Congress chose not to remove him from office as he was already out of office.

So why should double jeopardy come into play when he was never charged in a court of law on these crimes before?

Yet Congress has both law enforcement and judiciary abilities which it uses.

Why do you think it can only fall upon congress to remove an elected president and hold them to account? C'mon...lets see if you can think for yourself...

Bull if He became "Citizen" Trump why would he have Secret Security paid for by taxpayers ?????????

a reply to: JinMI

What statutes did Congress indict Trump for- violating?

originally posted by: Threadbarer
a reply to: Lazy88

What office did Trump hold in 2022?

Did he get any documents in 2022? Like the only documents Biden could get as senator if he took them himself?

a reply to: Ravenwatcher

Because it's part of his Presidential retirement plan. Complete immunity for life is not.

originally posted by: Threadbarer
a reply to: JinMI

What statutes did Congress indict Trump for- violating?

You'll have to look at the x2 impeachments.

a reply to: neoholographicpart2

We all knew this was coming ...its dc and they would twist and squirm to make it happen

Thankfully we have a supreme court where i just dont aee this ruling being uoheld

a reply to: JinMI

Congress is not a grand jury. They cannot indict someone. Trump was indicted on zero charges by Congress. Double jeopardy does not apply.

originally posted by: Threadbarer
a reply to: JinMI

Congress is not a grand jury. They cannot indict someone. Trump was indicted on zero charges by Congress. Double jeopardy does not apply.

It does show a biased continued pattern of harassment based on fabrication.

Added word pattern.

a reply to: Threadbarer

Nice try.

Seems you guys are taking some liberties with the 5th amendment...which is nothing new:

nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb;

a reply to: JinMI

You might want to actually look into how that clause has been interpreted by the courts over the years.

originally posted by: Threadbarer
a reply to: JinMI

You might want to actually look into how that clause has been interpreted by the courts over the years.

You might want to actually not stretch the Constitution to fit your definition and narrative.


Like I asked before,
what do you think of the judiciary assuming congress' responsibility?

a reply to: JinMI

The judiciary is not assuming Congress' responsibility. They're not trying to remove him from office. They're trying him for alleged crimes that the judiciary had ruled were not covered by Presidential immunity.

Where does the Constitution give Congress that responsibility?

So we are arguing both double jeopardy and as seen on page 41 that Trump ascertains he can only be charged if he was found guilty in the impeachment trial? So double jeopardy does not apply if found guilty but does apply if acquitted?

So, he just threw everything imaginable in the appeal?

a reply to: Threadbarer

Where does the Constitution give Congress that responsibility?

Impeachment, which is "solely" in congress' hands.

They're trying him for alleged crimes

That happened while in office...