It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Vermilion
a reply to: Sookiechacha
Biden openly weaponizes the DOJ and the rest of the government against Trump
SCOTUS calls out the bs
The libs and media call Trump the dictator đ¤Ą
originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: JinMI
This doesn't cover congress or impeachment.
It covers "absolute immunity" for official acts, even if those acts break a law. This opinion concludes that Nixon would not have had to turn over those tapes, that had evidence of malfeasance for Congress to use to impeach, today.
The Jan 6th Committee wouldn't have been able to subpoena White House officials or the Zelinsky phone call, used in Trump's impeachment trials.
originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Vermilion
Biden openly weaponizes the DOJ and the rest of the government against Trump
SCOTUS calls out the bs
They did not, so put your clown away. They legalized it.
originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Vermilion
That's not what I mean. SCOTUS opined that it was perfectly legal for the president to collude with the DOJ to go after political opponents. That's the exact thing that you guys have been crying about Biden doing, weaponizing the DOJ. Well, SCOTUS just confirmed that's absolutely immune conduct.
originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Vermilion
That's not what I mean. SCOTUS opined that it was perfectly legal for the president to collude with the DOJ to go after political opponents. That's the exact thing that you guys have been crying about Biden doing, weaponizing the DOJ. Well, SCOTUS just confirmed that's absolutely immune conduct.
In January, one of the first acts of the new Republican House majority was to establish a special subcommittee devoted to rooting out the ways the FBI and other federal bodies have supposedly been used as tools of political persecution.
âWe have a duty to get into these agencies and look at how they have been weaponized to go against the very people theyâre supposed to represent,â said Representative Jim Jordan, the Trump ally who chairs the body. Even less Trumpy members, like the establishment GOP stalwart Tom Cole, agreed: âIt is undeniable that in recent years, the executive branch of the federal government has abused its authority and violated the civil liberties of American citizens often for political purposes.â
And House GOP Conference Chair Elise Stefanik, D-N.Y., who heads the messaging operation, said in a statement that Trumpâs indictment âis the epitome of the illegal and unprecedented weaponization of the federal government against Joe Bidenâs leading opponent, Donald J. Trump.â
Biden making an official statement to attack the Supreme Court.
Seems odd given that a few weeks ago he made an official statement after the Trump NYC sham, saying that we need to respect court decisions or it undermines democracy.
originally posted by: WeMustCare
Where does the idea that the president is immune from criminal prosecution come from?
The Supreme Court has never held that a president is immune from criminal prosecution. Itâs the Department of Justice that says that. And because the Department of Justice controls all the federal prosecutors, it means that no federal prosecutor, including the new special counsel [investigating Bidenâs offsite storage of classified documents], can prosecute a sitting president. The Office of Legal Counsel in the Department of Justice thinks thereâs such a rule in the Constitution because it believes a criminal indictment and prosecution â and of course, punishment â would effectively incapacitate the presidency. And they further believe itâs unconstitutional to incapacitate the sitting president, and that the only means by which you can [legally] incapacitate the president are impeachment, which removes the president from office, or the 25th Amendment, which sidelines an incapacitated president. The OLC does not believe that a state prosecutor or even a federal prosecutor should be able to prosecute the president and eventually put him or her in jail, because they donât think the Constitution would allow a local or federal prosecutor to incapacitate the chief executive.