|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,470
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: US Supreme Court rejects Jack Smith’s request for justices to quickly hear Trump immunity dispute [Re: Enlil]
#28596584 - 12/24/23 01:06 PM (1 month, 3 days ago) |
|
|
So... you agree that it's not really relevant to whether or not the government can govern?
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
lifeiswhatyoumake
Trance in my sig n blood



Registered: 09/30/11
Posts: 16,709
Last seen: 2 minutes, 59 seconds
|
Re: US Supreme Court rejects Jack Smith’s request for justices to quickly hear Trump immunity dispute [Re: Enlil]
#28596591 - 12/24/23 01:15 PM (1 month, 3 days ago) |
|
|
Well, Congress just passed a law that doesn't let a President alone pull the USA out of NATO. I reckon this is in preparation for if Trump wins president. So, our government does seem a bit pre-occupied with a situation in which the president might be given immunity for inciting an insurrection during their presidency. If a definitive answer by the highest court is given (and they reject Trump's claim of immunity) then Congress can move on to not worrying about that and govern as normal for the people and not for a possible dictator.
So I do disagree a little, at least.
--------------------
  I dropped a trance track "Peace Love & Trance": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4uQBM-mRYU ;   
Edited by lifeiswhatyoumake (12/24/23 01:17 PM)
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,470
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: US Supreme Court rejects Jack Smith’s request for justices to quickly hear Trump immunity dispute [Re: Enlil]
#28596606 - 12/24/23 01:26 PM (1 month, 3 days ago) |
|
|
You think that law is in response to the criminal case? I think it's clear that the law is in response to trump running for president.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
lifeiswhatyoumake
Trance in my sig n blood



Registered: 09/30/11
Posts: 16,709
Last seen: 2 minutes, 59 seconds
|
Re: US Supreme Court rejects Jack Smith’s request for justices to quickly hear Trump immunity dispute [Re: Enlil]
#28596624 - 12/24/23 01:37 PM (1 month, 3 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: I think it's clear that the law is in response to trump running for president.
I agree. His running for presidency is directly tied to the criminal case, though, right?
--------------------
  I dropped a trance track "Peace Love & Trance": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4uQBM-mRYU ;   
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,470
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: US Supreme Court rejects Jack Smith’s request for justices to quickly hear Trump immunity dispute [Re: lifeiswhatyoumake]
#28596632 - 12/24/23 01:40 PM (1 month, 3 days ago) |
|
|
No. I don't see any nexus. His criminal case is about conduct from 3 years ago.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
lifeiswhatyoumake
Trance in my sig n blood



Registered: 09/30/11
Posts: 16,709
Last seen: 2 minutes, 59 seconds
|
Re: US Supreme Court rejects Jack Smith’s request for justices to quickly hear Trump immunity dispute [Re: Enlil]
#28596636 - 12/24/23 01:46 PM (1 month, 3 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: His criminal case is about conduct from 3 years ago.
Yes. But the 14th amendment says if you previously took an oath to the Constitution and then engaged in insurrection then you aren't eligible to run for public office, right? So I'm confused as to why you don't think that makes this criminal case directly related to him running for public office again.
--------------------
  I dropped a trance track "Peace Love & Trance": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4uQBM-mRYU ;   
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,470
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: US Supreme Court rejects Jack Smith’s request for justices to quickly hear Trump immunity dispute [Re: lifeiswhatyoumake]
#28596644 - 12/24/23 01:57 PM (1 month, 3 days ago) |
|
|
Because the criminal case isn't to determine whether he engaged in insurrection under the 14th amendment. If he's found to be immune to prosecution, it wont have any bearing on his 14th amendment qualification. Similarly, a criminal conviction or acquittal won't necessarily have any bearing either. If people want to challenge his qualification, they should avail themselves of the civil process.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
CHeifM4sterDiezL
Chief Globerts

Registered: 07/28/10
Posts: 22,529
Loc: United States
Last seen: 1 hour, 4 minutes
|
Re: US Supreme Court rejects Jack Smith’s request for justices to quickly hear Trump immunity dispute [Re: Enlil] 1
#28597177 - 12/24/23 10:28 PM (1 month, 2 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: How does this issue relate to that? It appears to me that this is about a criminal prosecution.
Any child that knows right from wrong knows what to do. We just have to pray to God that this time for once out of whatever that these scumbags and america realize all u have to do is actually just be true to what you said on paper it's really simple. If I lived in China or Russia or some these other totalitarian nations maybe I could understand. But I doubt it. This is America your trumptard mother fuckers.
|
|