President Donald Trump’s lawyer was asked about presidential immunity on Tuesday, by Federal Judge Florence Pan. The specifics of the question surrounded if President Trump could order SEAL Team Six to assassinate an American citizen (or presidential candidate) and if Absolute Immunity would apply.
President Trump’s attorney was prepared to answer the hypothetical question with a “qualified yes“; however, unfortunately the lawyer was not prepared to give Judge Pan a real-world example of this action that recently took place. It’s not a hypothetical; it was done recently. President Obama did exactly this.
CITATION – “Anwar al-‘Awlaqī; (April 1971 – 30 September 2011) was an American Islamic scholar and lecturer who was killed in 2011 in Yemen by a U.S. government drone strike ordered by President Barack Obama. Al-Awlaki became the first U.S. citizen to be targeted and killed by a drone strike from the U.S government.
President Barack Obama had absolute immunity for ordering the intentional killing of American citizen, Anwar al-Awlaqi. The issue of him being a presidential candidate is a non sequitur.
If Presidents did not have absolute immunity, or if the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals removes absolute immunity from President Trump, then Barack Obama can immediately be charged and arrested for killing al-Awlaqi. There is no statute of limitations for murder. Yes, this is the cold truth of the matter.
Additionally, 16-year-old American Citizen, Abdulrahman al-Awlaki, was killed in the same military assassination. Abdulrahman, a child, was standing next to his father; he was never accused of any wrongdoing; he was never charged with any unlawful conduct; he was an innocent bystander.
In 2011 when the Obama administration was questioned about killing the teenager, White House Spokesperson Robert Gibbs said, “I would suggest that you should have a far more responsible father if they are truly concerned about the well-being of their children. I don’t think becoming an al-Qaeda jihadist terrorist is the best way to go about doing your business.”
You can find the legal analysis from the Justice Department Memo Approving Targeted Killing of Anwar Al-Awlaki [HERE]. There was no legal justification or approval for the killing of 16-year-old Abdulrahman al-Awlaki.
[Citation, pdf beginning Page 67]
If the DC Appeals Court removes “absolute immunity” in order to prosecute President Donald J Trump, then the next administration can formally charge President Barack Obama with the specific and unlawful killing of an American citizen, with malice aforethought and specific intent to kill; ie homicide. Additional charges of manslaughter for the killing of the 16-year-old son are easily justified.
There is no statute of limitations for murder.
See how that works?
.
If this appeals court truly believes PDJT is NOT immune to their question of immunity regarding Seal team 6, then that would put him in the back of a very long list of war criminals as I’m sure we can all name quite a few. Can… meet Worms.
Being that the word “Rivals” is a contextually driven word and Enemy vs. Rival can be used interchangeably while understanding the slight connotations, I would have answered… “Depends on the “Rival”. Thank goodness I’m not the lawyer because I’d have these idiots messing themselves.
Leftists never think about consequences of their actions.
Many of those consequences are intended and foreseen consequences. An example of WHY Presidential immunity is in force covering the hypothetical question by this sellout Appeals Court judge – imagine Trump being charged by Iran supporters with 1st Degree murder for ordering missile strike on Qasem Soleimani commander of the Quds Force – IRG in 2020? Read Wikipedia and if a sheeple you would believe Trump is personally responsible for that assassination. Nevermind Soleimani was a terrorist target by our Mil Def Intel…
Never happen. If you haven’t noticed the double standard then you aren’t paying attention.
If Leftists did not have double standards ,they would have no standards at all.
In my very early law career I had the opportunity to clerk for a state appellate judge. The court in general, and my judge in particular, were considered ‘hot’, in the sense that they asked tough questions of the lawyers.
Usually, those kinds of judges asked questions that sounded like they were favorable to a particular position or outcome, but the reality is that their legal conclusions were opposite of the question they asked. The purpose of the question was to assess the weaknesses of their conclusion in a way to help clarify and bolster the opinion that would follow.
Not always the case, but I have seen far too many decisions by appellate courts that were contrary to the outcomes suggested by their questions during oral argument.
“Are we a country of Presidents or Kings. Trumps lawyer thinks we are a President of Kings”
My analogy is FJB’s disastrous withdrawal of Afghanistan. 13 US Military Members were killed. And, he left $85 Billion in Military Equipment to the Taliban. The IDF has found those exact weapons among the Hamas’ arsenal. China immediately went into Afghanistan and bought up the majority of mineral rights in Afghanistan. Did FJB give China a gift because he is compromised by and beholden to China?
Things that make you go hmmmm.
I think the murder question was planted simply to get the press to talk about it until the courts make a decision. In talking about it, asking if Trump murdering people would have immunity, it plants in peoples mind, TRUMP IS A MURDERER!
This tactic is a way of accusing someone of something without actually doing it. You know the question, “when did you stop beating your wife?” No matter if immunity is yes or no, it still insinuates Trump committing murder.
Republicans need to start asking back to media and democrats “Well, good question, if JoeBribem took bribes, or killed someone, or blackmailed Ukrainian officials as VP, would he also have immunity, even with dementia that could have clouded his thinking? Also, another interesting question would be if he took 50 million in payoffs, stole classified documents, and used email alias to hide his involvement with Hunter, as a private citizen, could he be arrested and charged while a sitting president?”
🎯
I would add on other point. There are such things as unlawful orders. If any President were to order the assassination of a political opponent who is not a real national security threat (e.g. terrorist) then I hope those asked to carry out the order would decline based on it being an unlawful order. There is risk to their careers, but when the light shines on them they will be in a better place then anyone else who went along with it.
You don’t give the order if you don’t know if it will be obeyed. Put together the right unit for the job first. I heard PDJT mention obama drone strikes but he was very gentle about it. I would have preferred he framed it more harshly, something like “well you remember Obama killed that kid with a drone strike”
Remember that just following orders is not a legal defense. Yes, so some will do it, but when caught they can be prosecuted.
Who is the law?
When the structure of government is founded on the notion of equal powers, no one power can take to task another, except as outlined in the Constitution in the impeachment clauses. Hence, for the President of the United States to be bound over to a court of law, to be judged on the basis of actions taken during his presidency is a total and unmitigated violation of the Constitution in its denial of the doctrine of separation of powers. It also denies the clear meaning of art. 1, Sec. 3 CL 7 which limits punishment only to the “convicted party” of an impeachment trial.
The very existence of impeachment in the Constitution is obviously proof that officers of the United States may not be bound over to bloodthirsty and politically motivated inquisitors or judges UNLESS THEIR CASES ARE FIRST ADJUDICATED BY THE SENATE, AND THEN, IF FOUND GUILTY, THEY MAY BE BOUND OVER TO COURTS OF LAW FOR TRIAL AND SENTENCING. BUT NOT BEFORE!
District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan has already denied the obvious meaning that I explained above. I HOPE SCOTUS HAS BETTER READING COMPREHENSION AND REASONING SKILLS.
The founders knew well that evil high priests would seek to wreak judicial havoc as a means of gaining political power.
Moreover, Democrats erroneously imply that the highest wisdom of justice rests not with a tribunal of 100 senators, but rather with Article III courts of law, when in fact the Constitution strongly implies the opposite in art. II, sec. 2, CL 1 :
“… [the president] shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, EXCEPT IN CASES OF IMPEACHMENT.”
In other words, the Constitution grants greater wisdom and finality to a judgement of guilt rendered by a senate impeachment tribunal than to one rendered by a federal judge and jury.
BINGO!
Furthermore, the above comment is strong evidence that double jeopardy does in fact attach in federal or state prosecutions after Senate impeachment acquittals because art. II, sec. 2, CL 1 strongly implies that if a president is found guilty after impeachment, his subsequent indictment and sentencing in federal court COULD NOT BE THE SUBJECT OF A REPRIEVE OR PARDON OWING SPECIFICALLY TO THE FACT HE WAS FOUND GUILTY AFTER AN IMPEACHMENT AND TRIAL IN THE SENATE!
The unavoidable conclusion would, therefore, be that to later try a defendant in federal or state court in which legal finality and ultimate wisdom- in the eyes of the founders- is junior to that of a Senate Tribunal, would in fact violate constitutionally prohibited double jeopardy.
BINGO!
Who ordered the assassination of JFK by the CIA?
George
LBJ.
Nice words but fraught with self righteous misbehavior.
Exactly the rationalization Lt Commander Emertitus Vindman used.
Also General Milley used to justify his heads up phone call to China.
I was in the military. I was 1st class petty officer and got two commanding officers’ in trouble. The issue is it takes good leaders to do the right thing. Once Vindman was not court martialed it is clear that his chain of command was supportive and should have been kicked out. General Milley should have been demoted and kicked out. We need to leadership from the top down. Hopefully Trump will understand this and if elected will take necessary action. I saw what Obama did to push out the good people and replace them with his stooges; it can be reversed.
I agree, John. I did 13 years in the Navy, Nuke MM. Nukes, by nature of our training, are taught to question all orders- Adm. Rickover did not want mindless monkies operating nuclear plants in the Navy.
I was a carrier Nuke. The airwing officers and pilots hated Nukes because we questioned everything. Why? Why do you want me to do A and B? Don’t question me; it’s an order that would be the typical response from airwing people. Ships force not so much- most understood that Nukes are trained to question.
Yes, sir, it is an order, but is it valid or lawful? How do I know if you can’t explain why? Many times it wasn’t a lawful order per se….it would be to do things they had no authority over, understanding, or responsibility for…..they just wanted something impeding their work or day removed.
And John, you are correct; if you stand firm, and have good leadership in your chain (i.e., not wimps, actual leaders), the individual giving the lawful order was dealt with- severity depending on the breadth and depth fo the unlawful order.
I was a Nuke ET. Glad to hear from another. Did my time on subs though.
And then later that can be reversed again.
Regarding ALL the problems we’ve seen and identified, merely replacing the vermin isn’t enough. We need systemic reforms so incumbents can’t keep slowly turning up the heat on the frying pan most of us are sitting in.
We need reforms that serve as DETERRENTS. Eg, if as a public official you impose unconstitutional laws, rules, decisions …. later declared to be unconstitutional, then you as an official must be — not merely reprimanded/wrist slapped — but demoted or more. Probably much more. Enough to force some cost / benefit calculus before the problematic action is ever taken. And the higher the position, the greater the demotion to the point of vacating the office and precluding future occupancy of public offices.
reversed
fwiw ymmv
Ted Macie, is an active-duty Naval Officer and a DoD whistleblower
Politicians fail to stand up for the men and women in our military
https://rumble.com/v3ypasz-politicians-fail-to-stand-up-for-the-men-and-women-in-our-military.html
Are you familiar with the Nuremberg trials?
And also the answer to the war criminals at the Nuremberg Trials.
“order the assassination of a political opponent who is not a real national security threat (e.g., terrorist)”
Sorry, this is still murder. You gather evidence, get a warrant, and then arrest them. Then, they, as American citizens, have a right to a fair trial. The use of the word terrorist does not give them cart blanche to murder people, but BHO did so—it matters not if they are political opponents or not.
Do you trust a government, like the one we have now, not to label someone as a terrorist to permit them to murder them? I don’t.
yeah, under this line of reasoning, what prevents Biden from assassinating Trump?
are Trumps laywers deep state plants?
What if you’re the terrorist and the national security threat?
If our sniper had gone against orders and actually shot the suicide bomber at the Kabul airport during our Afghanistan withdrawal , hundreds of lives would have been saved, including our 13 service members.
Or Beijing Biden’s admin could take out Trump…
I think Presidents should not have “absolute immunity” over the taking of a life, no matter who that is.
Only Kings, Emperors, and Tyrants have the power of Life and Death over their subjects.
Maybe there should be a distinction between a “civilian” and a “combatant” (in the physical, military sense).
Questions like these aren’t about absolutes. If that was the case, then Capital Punishment would be murder. And isn’t the executioner and the judge immune? Yea, but only in those limited cases.
This whole case has been railroaded to a place that has no relevance to the actual actions that President Trump was accused of.
And it’s why I think if they decide for immunity, the President Trump will be in grave danger. If they decide against immunity then he will be found guilty by the Clown Courts. Trumps lawyer should’ve not fallen for this line of questioning. They’ve been put in a loose/loose situation.
She wasn’t thinking about a case. She was idiotically trying to justify removing Pres Trump’s immunity for decisions while in office.
You’re right. But then the case got railroaded towards the absurd. Trump’s lawyer should’ve argued in a more nuanced direction (and back towards political decisions while in office) and stay away from absolutes.
She dragged it there for the visibility of a gotcha moment. It’s now being shoved up her ass sideways.
Political cases make bad law
The issue is not a President choking out his old lady over the tv remote or shooting her lover in a jealous rage. Everyone agrees that’s wrong. Nobody is arguing for that kind of immunity. The issue is criminalization of a President for doing his job. The President makes life or death decisions (unless he’s a puppet). They’re trying to say his actions as President in the course of carrying out his duties are criminal. That’s the immunity required and historically given to a President. It’s a difficult distinction to make with a soundbite. That makes it easier to mislead. Like saying anthrophomorphic climate change every time. It’s unweildly.
no worries here … fellow peasants … ‘GOD’ the ‘ OMNIPOTENT CREATOR AND RULER ‘ of all that there is … has this … the ‘tptb’ in this comedy we call a federal government … can’t stop tripping over each other making fools of themselves and showing the entire world the ‘banana republic ‘ that they have created trying to hang this man … keep at it geniuses … and ‘HE’ will continue to expose this comedy of errors … to the entire nation and all the world to see … ( lawn chairs and popcorn are optional … located on the white house front lawn … ) bring cash , we don’t take no ‘stinkin credit/debit cards … ) … t,hee , giggle , giggle …. cough , cough …….
I’m sure the judge thought “oh we got him now!”
Rather than stick to the facts they wheel out contrived hypothetical questions and a parade of horribles. It shows their desperation.
If the President is not immune then neither are any US agents or military who carry out targeted killings. Drone operators for example and their commanders would be obvious targets of ambitious prosecutors in locales with high populations sharing the ethnicity or even kinship with the targeted individuals.
For this very reason, military courts of justice are courts of original jurisdiction in cases of military personnel whose assignments obviously operate on the edges of legality and require FIRST adjudication by MILITARY personnel. Not by DC jurors. Similarly, impeachment trials are also courts of original jurisdiction in matters of POLITICAL conduct. Nobody can really believe that DC juries are the appropriate tribunals for second-guessing decisions of a President of the United States. Most people don’t even know who the VP is in most administrations, or whether France is found in Europe or Asia.
That is: nobody until now!
Hahahahahahaaha…………………..
Seeing the way these judges are treating Trump and his lawyers, they are bound to jail him. Then Biden will remove Trumps SS protection. That’s what I think is going to happen. Who’s going to stop them?
Change my mind.
jail him
Big Brother Barry will send him to D.E.I. Groom Rooms at Gitmo for emotional learning until he confesses his crimes against career political opportunists.
DeSeevus won’t stop them.
https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/110941541031715108
Back Alley Nikki won’t stop them.
https://revolver.news/2020/08/never-nikki-haley/
Expand your mind.
If you think that they would say that Trump does not have immunity and then go after Obama too, then you have one handful of crap and another full of empty wishes. The Great Chocolate Jesus is untouchable.
Time will tell.
For now. But history is full of examples of public opinion turning on once popular leaders. Barry isn’t immune.
Timeout–after the American teenager was killed, didn’t Obama joke, “If I had a son, he would look like Abdulrahman.”
I thought his son looked a lot like Vester Flanagan.
No. That was that skittles kid in Florida, Trevon Martin.
Biden’s decision to kill exactly the wrong family post Bagram air base gate explosion. Murder and cover up.
It never happens, but does it?
On 12/29/12, President Obama signed HR 4310, the 2013 National Defense Authorization Act. Section 1078 (thomas.loc. gov/cgi-
bin/query/z?c112:H.R.4310:) of the bill authorizes the use of propaganda inside the US, which had previously been banned since 1948 when the Smith- Mundt Act was passed.
Under HR 4310 the President of the United States can order “SEAL Team 6 to Assassinate Rivals”. And, tell everyone that they never authorized this killing. Because disinformation is legal.
Now, think about the variations of the action just described.
So does that mean our Govt acted illegally whenever it disseminated disinformation to its citizens during the intervening 230 years..?
Two thoughts cross my mind. Judge Pan asked this question:
1) to showcase, through a corrupt media, that Trump is unhinged and a clear and present danger
AND
2) to give cover to the regime for an assassination of Trump.
Trump is the danger. Ergo, we can and should do whatever it takes to remove Trump and kill off populist conservatism. Trump’s lawyers argued for immunity. We’ll oblige Biden with immunity.
Machiavellian in the extreme!
I don’t buy this.
Nothing is impossible or, in this case, improbable.
You don’t have to buy it. It doesn’t matter if you buy it or not. As SD says- we deal with reality here. And that scenario is very probable.
Would you have ever bought a U.S. President purposely keeping our border open in addition to helping facilitate human trafficking with their policies?
Would you have ever bought the U.S. Government using back doors and imbeds at technology companies to censor information?
Would you have ever bought the U.S. Government politically targeting a whole group of Americans?
Would you have ever bought that millions of people would argue that men can be women and vice versa, all while trying to give them special privileges?
Would you have ever bought that the Uniparty would steal an election so openly and blatantly as they did in 2020?
Would you have ever bought that the U.S. government would try to force a Reichstag Fire (i.e., Jan 6) on the American populace?
Reality doesn’t care what we buy.
Those are all good points, but the reality is God is ultimately in control and nothing happens unless He allows it too. Even King David didn’t get away with murdering his rival. At some point the hourglass empties, and time is up for the wicked.
What about this seems invalid to you? Saying you don’t buy it without elaborating on your objection(s) is weak sauce.
A Civilization survives if there are rules and they are followed.
Taking someone’s life according to the rules of combat, or the laws of the land is one thing. Taking one’s life because of the safety of Absolute Immunity is what Absolute Monarchs did. So, then, why did you want a Republic? The British could’ve ruled you still.
Absolute Immunity or Absolute Power over someone else will lead to the eventual end of that Civilization.
One more thing (if you’ve seen my other comments):
Trumps enemies (and he has many) will reason he’s planning to do something to them since he’s asking for Absolute Immunity of the kind discussed above.
So, then, what do you think will happen? His enemies will want to do to him what they’re afraid will be done to them… and the Media will have a field day laughing that Trump signed his own existential threat warrant.
Not a good thing.
This case should’ve been talked more in nuances and not absolutes. The Lawyers fell for a lose/lose situation.
bimbo in a black robe … what a moron … ( no need to comment any further … )
The court attempted to draw a moral equivalency between his example and DJT’s actions. The analogy fails for one primary reason. The court’s example involves a presidential order for a specific act, i.e., the intentional death of a citizen, which is not the moral equivalent of exercising presidential responsibility and discretion when protecting the integrity of a failed voting process. Reasonable folk can differ as to the propriety of the latter, but few if any would consider the former to be debatable.
Most governmental immunity draws distinctions between discretionary acts taken to fullfil a governmental responsibility, and acts which are unrelated to those same responsibilities.
Reasonable folk, sure but what about the millions of morons around us? And the imported jack boots?
Fortunately, to some extent, the “reasonable folk” test does not depend on finding and canvassing reasonable folk. If it did, that search would be mostly fruitless, much Diogenes’ honest man.
The court would employ a rhetorical device of first describing and defining “reasonable”, then apply that definition to the facts at hand. At that point the parties are at the mercy of the judge, but isn’t that always the case?
So, do we now have to rename The Light Bringer to The Light Dimmer if Obama gets the electric chair?
good one, PA
after I got the first part, a second later I got the 2nd part
Chicago Jesus needs to be on the run, yanked from a sweaty mideast shithole like the real Saddam.
This hypothetical scenario is irrelevant, the question isn’t about murder, it’s about presidents immunity in discovering election fraud! The judge gave a gift to the media! Idiot!
election fraud
Obama in 2008 Boasts to Ohioans ‘It Helps’ That Dems Are ‘in Charge of’ Voting Machines
https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2016/10/18/watch-obama-2008-boasts-ohioans-helps-dems-charge-voting-machines/
the media
Alex MacCallum, Bezos’ chief revenue officer at WaPo, resigned after six months, shortly after the appt. of its new British CEO, Will Lewis. Alex is going to CNN to work with former NYT boss Mark Thompson.
The Washington Post is collapsing
Jeff Bezos’ prized paper is losing $100 million a year.
Subcriptions down more than 50% over past few years.
https://www.dossier.today/p/the-washington-post-is-collapsing
So, does Biden have immunity in ordering the persecution of his rival????
Build Johnson Better
Shocking developments in Georgia’s racketeering case
“The fact that this guy put on the invoices, the White House… they are involved.”
@3:30
https://rumble.com/v463299-the-absolute-truth-with-emerald-robinson-january-9-2024.html
Your honor, do you smile when you molest helpless children? Yes or No! Yes or No??
The Yes or No questioning is a setup designed by crooked lawyers & corrupt judges. The Whole Truth is what matters.
“Senator!
“Will you confirm or deny that you’ve stopped molesting young boys?”
.
.
“Senator?”
molest helpless children
Flashback: When Nancy Pelosi’s Brother Was Indicted For Rape
New York Times December 12, 1953, p. 16
Baltimore, Dec.11(UP)- A Baltimore city grand jury recommended today that Franklin D. Roosevelt D’Alesandro, son of Baltimore’s Mayor, be prosecuted for lying during his recent rape trial.
The grand jury also recommended that an indictment be drawn against James Pollack, long-time Democratic political leader, for trying to obstruct justice during the trial in which the youth won acquittal.
The grand jury made its recommendations in which presentments, which in this state precede the issuance of indictments. D’Alesandro, 20-year-old son of Mayor Thomas D’Alesandro, was charged, with more than a dozen other youths, of moral charges in two girls, ages 11 and 13.
https://nalert.blogspot.com/2018/09/flashback-when-nancy-pelosis-brother.html
What a sick family!
“The Ukrainian policy for the United States has gotta be, pretty stark. That is, we hang with them until they win.”
— George W. Bush Nov. 16, 2022
“…the decision of one man to launch a wholly unjustified and brutal invasion of Iraq…I mean, Ukraine!”
Video: George W. Bush Makes Another HUGE Admission?
https://wltreport.com/2023/11/15/george-w-bush-makes-another-huge-admission/
Correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t the Obama administration kill Seal Team 6?
Sent them on a mission in Afghan
2011 Afghanistan Boeing Chinook shootdown
Extortion 17
In fact if you look up how many U.S. Ambassadors have been killed, they’ve mostly been killed during Democrat Administrations. And I would say that the whole Benghazi mess is Obama/Biden/Hillary’s fault. And I know we have 13 military lives lost due directly because of Biden.
Be very careful what you wish for, Democrats.
“He came to me to make sure I was supporting his sound policies. Of course, since his sound policies are more like the policies people like me have been advocating for quite a while, I’m happy to support them. He’s a born-again neo-con.”
Bill Kristol declares Obama ‘a born-again neo-con’ days after consulting with him on Libya policy
https://dailycaller.com/2011/03/30/bill-kristol-declares-obama-a-born-again-neo-con-days-after-consulting-with-him-on-libya-policy/
This is Jack Smith and Marc Elias hypothetical and a planned gotcha moment.
Exactly.
I think the murder question was planted simply to get the press to talk about it until the courts make a decision. In talking about it, asking if Trump murdering people would have immunity, it plants in peoples mind, TRUMP IS A MURDERER!
This tactic is a way of accusing someone of something without actually doing it. You know the question, “when did you stop beating your wife?” No matter if immunity is yes or no, it still insinuates Trump committing murder.
Tell me, what ‘next administration ‘ would have Obama prosecuted for murder of a 16 year old?………I’m waiting,,,,,
But, but, but it was “Double-Oh Bama” licensed to kill. He takes his Nobel Peace prizes shaken not stirred. From Kenya with love.
Lincoln killed hundreds of thousands of US Citizens on his orders. They were born in the USA and Lincoln insisted they could never secede from the USA. Therefore they remained US Citizens. But they were waging war against the USA, just like the Al-Awlaki family.
(Of course this is exactly the same line of reasoning the Dems are trying to build up to when they call Trump and all MAGA supporters “insurrectionists.”)
History decides winners and losers, not the law.
Build Extortion Better? Make Shakedowns History Again
Biden warned the former Ukrainian President against prosecuting his opponents
https://rumble.com/v361w5l-paul-manafort-biden-warned-the-former-ukrainian-president-against-prosecuti.html
“J6… a day unparalleled since the Civil War, Pearl Harbor and 911. A day that will live on in infamy! The inhumanity! The sheer horror!
“Something about the casual nature of strolling peacefully in the Capitol while the police seemed apathetic is absolutely chilling!”
twitter.com/jmbenson1491/status/1536128491317600257
Checkmate!
These judges aren’t very smart.
Oh sure they are
They drummed up a malicious fantasy to besmirch PresidentTrump
… one that’ll be eaten up like cookies and milk by half the frikkin’ country
Perzactly!
Have you ever heard a more ridiculous question from a judge?
Seal team 6 are war fighters not assassins and more than likely turn down the assignment. And we are not talking about assassination orders from a President here. Of course a President has immunity, the things a President may have to order can and may be construed as illegal action. The Supreme Court interpretation of, Article II Section 2 Clause 3.
This is one in my opinion the supreme court will defiantly want to hear.
Everything we are seeing is related to our 1st amendment rights. Right to Peaceably Assemble, the Right of the People to Petition the Government for a Redress of Grievances. You tell me what was J6 all about other than this?
I have a contrary point of view.
All men are created equal and endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, among them, the rights toa life, Liberty, and the pursuitof happiness. (Pursuitof happinessin the Scottish Enlightenment sense of Telos. )
This is the natural law, which the drafters of the Declaration of Independence held to be foundational, and which is under attack. Admittedly, the drafters of the Constitution were to some extent a different set of men, but they were still rooted in the understanding set forth above.
No, the President is Not Above the Law. When John Yoo made that argument with respect to the powers of the presidency under Bush, I vehemently disagreed.
Yes, Obama committed murder when he ordered the drone death of a 16 year old American Citizen, and he should be arrested, tried, and sentenced to death for having done it.
You say, that will never happen. I say, reading certain tea leaves,
Yes. It. Will.
We are setting up the boomerang to arrest and try every past president from W to Clinton to Obama.
This is necessary to cut the bslls off the intelligence state, to restore the American Republic, and to restore the Rule of Law.
This goes well beyond what happens to President Trump – who, by the way, has nothing to fear because he never committed any crime.
You can call me wacky, but I do think this is 5 D chess. Just like him baiting them
Into going after his taxes to establish that it is okay to subpoena personal taxes, family member taxes, and business taxes – all while knowing his were as pure as the driven snow – so that when the time comes, there will be no sustainable objections to obtaining the Clinton Foundation, McCain Foundation, James Biden, and Nancy Pelosi taxes etc . . . It is all about the boomerang.
Too many are analyzing this as to whether we have President Ttump’s back. He doesn’t need us to have his personal back in this dispute. He has committed no crimes.
What needed to go was the public mind’s Rule about not prosecuting former Presidents. Except for President Trump, THEY ARE ALL CRIMINALS.
And they are worse criminals than you can begin to imagine. There are credible allegations of Obama performing Satanic Ritual Abuse of a 10 year old while President. At least, I find them credible once you fit all the other puzzle pieces together.
Stop and think: Do you really want to say he has to be impeached first, – already having left office – for that act, if committed while he was President?
Of course not.
There must be some limiting factors and principals that walk the line between allowing a President to faithfully execute the laws of the United States without fear of prosecution and allowing the types of crimes these very sick people – the Clintons, Bushes, and Obama’s – committed to go unpunished- to the severe detriment of the principal of the rule of law.
Immunity can only apply to official actions carried out while faithfully executing the laws of the US, within the boundaries of the Bill of Rights. IMHO.
And there is no doubt that the Awlaki child was denied his right to life, without due process
“More facts must be collected, and more time flow off, before the world will be ripe for decision. In the meantime, doubt is wisdom.”
–Thomas Jefferson to General Chastellux, 1785
If Trump committed a crime by overstating the value of his business for loan purposes, wouldn’t it also be a crime for any homeowner to overstate their homes value to get a loan?
This could also apply to every business that “understates” their value in order to try to pay lower taxes. Wouldn’t that be tax fraud according to judge Engorgeupon and AG James? As an assessor I saw hundreds of documents trying to claim the value was much lower than tax records show. No one is ever prosecuted for trying.
“One of the more amusing aspects of modern progressive polemic is their breathless attacks on the unitary executive theory.”
–Bill Barr
https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4830574/user-clip-unitary-executive-theory
The Hackery of Judge Florence Pan
https://archive.is/pKlFD
Kaitlin Collins is past his prime.
And the black guy would be a lot smarter if he wore a bow tie.
The stooges on the appellate panel will make an exception in President Trump’s case.
Apparently the CIA also has absolute immunity when carrying out the murder of a US citizen. Example: November 22, 1963 in Dallas, Texas.
The attorney should not answer a speculative question. Or if he does he could say he needs as much time as the judge has to come to an answer. The lawyers answer is irrelevant anyway, a distraction from the specific issue at hand.
The French experimented with an executive directory.
“I had formerly looked with great interest to the experiment which was going on in France… I have not, however, been satisfied whether the dissensions of that Directory (and which I fear are incident to a plurality) were not the most effective cause of the successful usurpations which overthrew them.”
–Thomas Jefferson to Augustus B. Woodward, 1809
“In these massacres, six or seven thousand persons are murdered — and for what? Why the old stale plea of necessity is called in to justify it — and liberty in this case, as religion in the massacre of St. Bartholomew is made the stalking horse to drive the trade of butchering their fellow men.”
–Noah Webster, The Revolution in France (1794)
Remember Sundance. The argument will be “political rival” not American citizen.
It’s a rediculous premise anyways.
But they want a gotcha question.
The Constitution is pretty clear, the President if impeached by the House and convicted by the Senate loses that immunity
The clause reads if convicted is subject to trial and punishment of the law.
That to me is pretty clear.
The founders did not want Presidents at the whim of state and Federal ( there were very few then) prosecutors to tie the President up with BS.
They also clearly recognized that some Presidents may go beyond their authority.
The impeachment clause fixed that. If the Presidents conduct was aggregious enough he would be impeached and if convicted he would be subject to trial
I ask go and read it and tell me any other explanation for the clause to be written the way it was
I heard some discussion the other day that is easy to understand why the president has immunity for actions in office. Imagine any state AG or even a large city police department arresting the president while in office as he arrived for a speech somewhere, for whatever they deem to be a crime. Doesn’t really matter what the perceived crime is. Can’t have that happen. Immunity.
Could the president sneak out of the oval office to buy some drugs on the streets of DC? Sure. But, the only way any prosecution or arrest can happen is if he is impeached and removed. Obviously the seal team 6 hypothetical is ridiculous because that would be an illegal order and would hopefully not be carried out.
The hard part is whether the president did something as an official duty or in the nations best interests. The spin on a drug buy could be “My son is addicted and I just wanted to find out for myself about this issue so I got personally involved” Sounds like Joe, but the recourse is for congress to investigate and decide within the impeachment/removal process.
If he were impeached but not removed that would signify some in congress do not agree on the crime, thus no prosecution during or after his term.
Background, for context before answering the absolute immunity question:
After Bin-Laden raid in May 2011 (guess whom was taking credit, b o ?, ever miss ‘wagged a tail’ for attention ?)
in an apparent tradeoff for Bin-Laden where abouts from untold sources,
in sad, devastating quid pro quo fashion,
17 seal team members lost lives, via seal helicopter intel, whereabouts being nefariously shared Aug. 6 2011. (just months after b-l raid )
Coincidence? or an untold planned conspiracy ?
You decide.
Were there any consequences for miss commander-in-chief (or all brag, and ignore some fact(s)? )
Article, year 2013, 2 years,
After, AFTER the 2011 (b o pre-election tail wagging for untold political persuasion$, with help of the media ignoring whole story, until after, AFTER an election – again (in, on the gig )
https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/05/09/obama-put-a-target-on-their-backs-seal-team-6-family-members-say
With the above context,
Maybe someone wants to rephrase the question of this article?
(because, question has been answer, by b o and d c, deep state double standard, miss bubble per 2011 miss action(s). )
Original question in article above:
Yes or No
Could a president whom ordered a seal team
to assassinate a political rival,
who was not impeached,
would he (or she) be subject to criminal prosecution?
If no, that is absolute immunity.
If no, are there others (not the president), following the commander-in-chief, president command, that also have absolute immunity
p.s. there was no criminal prosecution.
Re-phrased question:
Yes or No
Could a president whom ordered a (
seal team) undisclosed political allyto assassinate a (
political rival) seal team,who was not impeached,
would he (or she) be subject to criminal prosecution?
If no, that is absolute immunity.
If no, are there others (not the president), following the commander-in-chief, president command, that also have absolute immunity?
p.s. there was no criminal prosecution.
p.s.
in 2011, the v p brandon, called bin laden raid, to b o, a really big f deal, with (arrogant) pol. smile$. [ and has copy catted the wag the tail, for politic$, at the cost of live$. ]
Instead, the person’s net worths, $, have $welled. ( and d c is silent, for over a decade )
Is that ‘loving thy neighbor’?
hmmm….
…this is 2024…
does someone see any ‘progress’,
or more same ‘ol backwards ‘progress’ and planned deterioration of ‘our (fake, pretend) democracy’)
imho
Love thy neighbors
‘we the people’ have honest answers. [ others play pretend…offer wooden-nickels… and ca$h in… ]
Seeking the whole truths…
If the court rules against the Trump immunity claim, does that mean that Obama can be tried for murdering two American citizens, Anwar al Awlaki and his son?
Seems unconscionable for a judge to even ask this question.
Understanding that these rabid liberals usually do the things they accuse others of doing… this is probably something they wouldn’t mind doing to a certain presidential political opponent – and whitewashing it.