Trump urges Supreme Court to act before his sentencing

[Gunny]

Not sure what he thinks the Supreme Court can do?

Donald Trump urges Supreme Court to act before his sentencing (thehill.com) (https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4699894-trump-supreme-court-sentencing-hush-money-trial/)

[Kathianne]

Not sure what he thinks the Supreme Court can do?

Donald Trump urges Supreme Court to act before his sentencing (thehill.com) (https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4699894-trump-supreme-court-sentencing-hush-money-trial/)

I think he wants them to rule he's immune from these lawsuits.

[SassyLady]

I think he wants them to rule he's immune from these lawsuits.

I think he wants immunity taken away so he can go after previous presidents for their crimes.

The more he looks like he fights something the harder they push to make it happen.

[fj1200]

^Because that would only add to the pettiness. Besides, what are those alleged crimes?

[SassyLady]

^Because that would only add to the pettiness. Besides, what are those alleged crimes?

"Novel" perhaps?

He did have access to classified info. Probably a few crimes in there somewhere.

I don't see it as pettiness. I see it as exposing corruption.

[fj1200]

"Novel" perhaps?

He did have access to classified info. Probably a few crimes in there somewhere.

I don't see it as pettiness. I see it as exposing corruption.

He had the chance when he wasn't draining the swamp. Besides nobody is talking about removing immunity regarding official acts. He wants immunity from his unofficial acts.

[SassyLady]

He had the chance when he wasn't draining the swamp. Besides nobody is talking about removing immunity regarding official acts. He wants immunity from his unofficial acts.

Wrong.

[fj1200]

Wrong.

Very compelling. Has he made comments about prosecuting former POTUSi?

[SassyLady]

Very compelling. Has he made comments about prosecuting former POTUSi?
PPORT INDEPENDENT, FACT-BASED JOURNALISM.
DONATE
Menu
AP Logo
Show Search

India election results
MDMA therapy
US primaries
Djokovic withdraws
Israel-Hamas war
POLITICS
Trump warns of ‘Pandora’s box’ of perpetual presidential prosecutions if charges against him stand
Donald Trump staunchly defends his case after federal appeals court judges in Washington expressed deep skepticism that the former president is immune from prosecution on charges that he plotted to overturn the results of the 2020 election. (Jan. 9)

Read More
Videos
2
Photos
3
BY NICHOLAS RICCARDI
Updated 8:29 PM MST, January 9, 2024
Share
Former President Donald Trump has long vowed to prosecute President Joe Biden if Trump wins November’s election and the two trade places. He upped the stakes dramatically Tuesday, contending that if criminal charges against him aren’t dropped, any current and future ex-presidents also could be prosecuted.

“I feel that as a president, you have to have immunity, very simple,” Trump said after a court hearing where a panel of three federal judges seemed deeply skeptical of his attorneys’ arguments that presidents have immunity from prosecution for official business. “It’s the opening of a Pandora’s box and it’s a very, very sad thing that’s happened with this whole situation.”

Trump said Biden might not be the only one targeted. Former President Barack Obama could end up being prosecuted, he said, citing Obama administration drone strikes in the Middle East that killed a U.S. citizen who was identified as a leader of the terrorist group al-Qaida and that man’s 16-year-old son, also a U.S. citizen. In court, Trump’s attorney suggested that former President George W. Bush could be prosecuted for providing false information that launched the Iraq War.
https://apnews.com/article/trump-immunity-prosecution-obama-biden-revenge-0c29591ac06a48832b77fab64dc68931

[fj1200]

PPORT INDEPENDENT, FACT-BASED JOURNALISM.
DONATE
Menu
AP Logo
Show Search

India election results
MDMA therapy
US primaries
Djokovic withdraws
Israel-Hamas war
POLITICS
Trump warns of ‘Pandora’s box’ of perpetual presidential prosecutions if charges against him stand
Donald Trump staunchly defends his case after federal appeals court judges in Washington expressed deep skepticism that the former president is immune from prosecution on charges that he plotted to overturn the results of the 2020 election. (Jan. 9)

Read More
Videos
2
Photos
3
BY NICHOLAS RICCARDI
Updated 8:29 PM MST, January 9, 2024
Share
Former President Donald Trump has long vowed to prosecute President Joe Biden if Trump wins November’s election and the two trade places. He upped the stakes dramatically Tuesday, contending that if criminal charges against him aren’t dropped, any current and future ex-presidents also could be prosecuted.

“I feel that as a president, you have to have immunity, very simple,” Trump said after a court hearing where a panel of three federal judges seemed deeply skeptical of his attorneys’ arguments that presidents have immunity from prosecution for official business. “It’s the opening of a Pandora’s box and it’s a very, very sad thing that’s happened with this whole situation.”

Trump said Biden might not be the only one targeted. Former President Barack Obama could end up being prosecuted, he said, citing Obama administration drone strikes in the Middle East that killed a U.S. citizen who was identified as a leader of the terrorist group al-Qaida and that man’s 16-year-old son, also a U.S. citizen. In court, Trump’s attorney suggested that former President George W. Bush could be prosecuted for providing false information that launched the Iraq War.
https://apnews.com/article/trump-immunity-prosecution-obama-biden-revenge-0c29591ac06a48832b77fab64dc68931

This /\ /\ does not equal \/ \/


I think he wants immunity taken away so he can go after previous presidents for their crimes.

The more he looks like he fights something the harder they push to make it happen.

[SassyLady]

This /\ /\ does not equal \/ \/

You asked if he had ever made comments. I show you an article that shows he has made comments.

You really like to go around in circles don't you fj?

[fj1200]

You asked if he had ever made comments. I show you an article that shows he has made comments.

You really like to go around in circles don't you fj?

When your evidence is dubious at best circularity is almost a requirement. You're argument that this statement...


“I feel that as a president, you have to have immunity, very simple,” Trump said

... means that he wants immunity stripped away for all past presidents. Not exactly a smoking gun.

[SassyLady]

When your evidence is dubious at best circularity is almost a requirement. You're argument that this statement...



... means that he wants immunity stripped away for all past presidents. Not exactly a smoking gun.

That's because you focus on one little thing that is said instead of taking in many different sources and getting the overall picture. He's focused on putting himself out there to set precedents so he can go after the deep state. If you can't understand that then that's OK. Some people take longer to wake up than others.

NCSWIC

[fj1200]

That's because you focus on one little thing that is said instead of taking in many different sources and getting the overall picture. He's focused on putting himself out there to set precedents so he can go after the deep state. If you can't understand that then that's OK. Some people take longer to wake up than others.

NCSWIC

You make broad sweeping statements, have nothing to back them up, get called on it, claim knowledge that others don't have, declare victory.

I guess you win.

[SassyLady]

You make broad sweeping statements, have nothing to back them up, get called on it, claim knowledge that others don't have, declare victory.

I guess you win.
The knowledge I have you can have as well but you refuse to even consider watching or listening. If it's not written down you don't want to even attempt to educate yourself with it.

[fj1200]

The knowledge I have you can have as well but you refuse to even consider watching or listening. If it's not written down you don't want to even attempt to educate yourself with it.

You certainly do have a lot of knowledge. The problem is that much of it is not true.

[SassyLady]

You certainly do have a lot of knowledge. The problem is that much of it is not true.

How would you know? You don't even entertain the possibilities. Somehow you are all knowing about truth. You depend on to many fact checkers who are basically paid censors.

Trump is seeking precedents so investigations can be done on previous administrations. Believe it or not.

[fj1200]

How would you know? You don't even entertain the possibilities. Somehow you are all knowing about truth. You depend on to many fact checkers who are basically paid censors.

Trump is seeking precedents so investigations can be done on previous administrations. Believe it or not.

I've seen scores of what you've posted over the past few years and I've come to some conclusions. You have no idea how much I have entertained. You have no idea what I depend on. I hardly post on here on all topics so I've never claimed I'm all knowing about anything.

On this topic however I know what you've said and what you've presented as evidence and they clearly do not equal each other. But you believe it so it's your truth; postmodernist thought run amok.

[Kathianne]

I've seen scores of what you've posted over the past few years and I've come to some conclusions. You have no idea how much I have entertained. You have no idea what I depend on. I hardly post on here on all topics so I've never claimed I'm all knowing about anything.

On this topic however I know what you've said and what you've presented as evidence and they clearly do not equal each other. But you believe it so it's your truth; postmodernist thought run amok.

Harsh, but true. I always understood that it is valuable to watch what others accuse you of, nearly always their own flaw.

I try to not attack others for their beliefs, regardless of whether or not I think credible.

When my offense is not hopping on their bandwagons and leads to their name calling and such, time to let it go.

[SassyLady]

I've seen scores of what you've posted over the past few years and I've come to some conclusions. You have no idea how much I have entertained. You have no idea what I depend on. I hardly post on here on all topics so I've never claimed I'm all knowing about anything.

On this topic however I know what you've said and what you've presented as evidence and they clearly do not equal each other. But you believe it so it's your truth; postmodernist thought run amok.

Prove it.
What have I said that doesn't have evidence?

[SassyLady]

Harsh, but true. I always understood that it is valuable to watch what others accuse you of, nearly always their own flaw.

I try to not attack others for their beliefs, regardless of whether or not I think credible.

When my offense is not hopping on their bandwagons and leads to their name calling and such, time to let it go.

You and I have rarely agreed Kath but we've always been respectful. When you agree with fj when he dismisses me it's the same as if you are saying it yourself but kinda PA which isn't like you.

Be more direct in your condemnation of me if that's what you're feeling.

[fj1200]

Prove it.
What have I said that doesn't have evidence?

I thought I did in posts #10 & #12. Other than that it's hard to prove a negative which is part of the problem with a postmodernist.

[SassyLady]

I thought I did in posts #10 & #12. Other than that it's hard to prove a negative which is part of the problem with a postmodernist.



Trump said Biden might not be the only one targeted. Former President Barack Obama could end up being prosecuted, he said, citing Obama administration drone strikes in the Middle East that killed a U.S. citizen who was identified as a leader of the terrorist group al-Qaida and that man’s 16-year-old son, also a U.S. citizen. In court, Trump’s attorney suggested that former President George W. Bush could be prosecuted for providing false information that launched the Iraq War.

I said Trump wants precedent set about presidential immunity so that prior administrations can be investigated. You agreed that he did not. And yet in the article you said disproves he said it is this quote. I think you are confused.

He's willing to give up immunity in order to open the door. He knows he's done nothing as bad as the previous Admins.

[fj1200]

I said Trump wants precedent set about presidential immunity so that prior administrations can be investigated. You agreed that he did not. And yet in the article you said disproves he said it is this quote. I think you are confused.

He's willing to give up immunity in order to open the door. He knows he's done nothing as bad as the previous Admins.

You couldn't type two sentences without a contradiction. Try again.

[Gunny]

You couldn't type two sentences without a contradiction. Try again.I do not see that it benefits Trump in any way to sacrifice himself on the altar. In fact, that would be quite out of character for him.

I also do not see where any such notion as presented that Trump could use it to go after former Presidents does a damned thing for the benefit of this Nation. Besides not going anywhere.

Rest assured what won't be addressed by anyone is the disparity in treatment between Trump and "other" Presidents. Trump didn't cover his ass. A problem that seems to plague the arrogant. I was surprised they didn't go after him in the manner they are now back when they were playing Russian Collusion. Doesn't make it right. On the other hand, no way he could be in the positions he has held without some dirt under the rug; especially, dust than can misconstrued as mountains.

[fj1200]

I do not see that it benefits Trump in any way to sacrifice himself on the altar. In fact, that would be quite out of character for him.

I also do not see where any such notion as presented that Trump could use it to go after former Presidents does a damned thing for the benefit of this Nation. Besides not going anywhere.

Rest assured what won't be addressed by anyone is the disparity in treatment between Trump and "other" Presidents. Trump didn't cover his ass. A problem that seems to plague the arrogant. I was surprised they didn't go after him in the manner they are now back when they were playing Russian Collusion. Doesn't make it right. On the other hand, no way he could be in the positions he has held without some dirt under the rug; especially, dust than can misconstrued as mountains.

He's someone who has never taken responsibilities for his actions.