All The Times Republican Supreme Court Justices Lied About Presidential Immunity Under Oath

[stxjimmy]

Let’s just split the difference and agree that Derpy is an “Ass-clown”.



Derpy the Ass-clown

asS-cLoWn.

 

[Bray123]

asS-cLoWn.

Point of order; he's proud of his incest-porn.

That makes him incEst-imBeciLe.

 

[contrifan32]

Great post, comrade dumbfuck.

Owning the libs is much more important to you than your freedom and your country.

You miss the point my comment has nothing to do with owning Libs. You and your ilk are twisting in the wind over nothing. It reall is going to be OK.

 

[DeluxAuto]

You miss the point my comment has nothing to do with owning Libs. You and your ilk are twisting in the wind over nothing. It reall is going to be OK.

SCOTUS justices lying under oath is "nothing."

Lol


You fuckers lost your minds when Obama wore a tan suit.

 

[adrina]

You miss the point my comment has nothing to do with owning Libs. You and your ilk are twisting in the wind over nothing. It reall is going to be OK.

Why are you okay with SCOTUS justices lying under oath?

And frankly, I don't want to hear anyone try to tell us that we are overreacting. We were told we were overacting in 2016 when we put our concerns about scotus forward. We were told roe was safe, we were told precedent would be respected, we were told that "everything will be okay".

After what has happened with the supreme Court, especially in light of all the warnings put out, you don't have any credibility to reassure us. You are among the group of liars from 2016.

Again why is it okay for a supreme Court Justice to commit perjury?

 

[Mrtenant]

45 out of 46 presidents did not need strong immunity

 

[JohnEngelman]

All The Times Republican Supreme Court Justices Lied About Presidential Immunity Under Oath​

A review of three GOP Supreme Court nominees testifying under oath that they don't think presidents can have the sort of immunity they invented yesterday.​

https://abovethelaw.com/2024/07/republican-supreme-court-justices-lying-trump-immunity/

https://twitter.com/x/status/1807855254006124944

https://twitter.com/x/status/1807882444663587082

https://twitter.com/x/status/1808142447458885671

So much for those words under oath. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

The Supreme Court is giving Trump the power to rule as an electoral dictator. If Trump is returned to the White House he may declare that he was elected President for Life. On the internet I have encourntered posters who want Trump to do that. The more popular Trump is the more dangerous he becomes.

 

[TastySuckToy]

All the Supreme Court did was reiterate the existing law and fact that Presidents have immunity from criminal charges while exercising actions that fall under the perview of the office.

For example, a President doesn't get charged with murder for ordering a drone strike that kills people, even though killing people is against the law. This is the kind of immunity that was ruled on.

This doesn't mean the President can walk out and shoot someone they don't like, because that is not under the scope of Presidential duties, while a drone strike on the basis of anti terrorism intel is.

If at some point the President commits acts or orders actions where it's questionable if they fall under the perview of Presidential duties, then the other branches begin an investigation and initiate impeachment actions if needed. After which if said President is found to have acted outside given authority, criminal charges can then be laid.

 

[adrina]

The Supreme Court is giving Trump the power to rule as an electoral dictator. If Trump is returned to the White House he may declare that he was elected President for Life. On the internet I have encourntered posters who want Trump to do that. The more popular Trump is the more dangerous he becomes.

 

[adrina]

All the Supreme Court did was reiterate the existing law and fact that Presidents have immunity from criminal charges while exercising actions that fall under the perview of the office.

For example, a President doesn't get charged with murder for ordering a drone strike that kills people, even though killing people is against the law. This is the kind of immunity that was ruled on.

This doesn't mean the President can walk out and shoot someone they don't like, because that is not under the scope of Presidential duties, while a drone strike on the basis of anti terrorism intel is.

If at some point the President commits acts or orders actions where it's questionable if they fall under the perview of Presidential duties, then the other branches begin an investigation and initiate impeachment actions if needed. After which if said President is found to have acted outside given authority, criminal charges can then be laid.

No they didn't. They excluded specific evidence from being considered. They, once again, overstepped their bounds.

No president has needed it before and no president is supposed to have it. That's the way it works in America. Maybe you like to bow down to kings but we do not.

 

[Bn2f]

This doesn't mean the President can walk out and shoot someone they don't like, because that is not under the scope of Presidential duties, while a drone strike on the basis of anti terrorism intel is.

If at some point the President commits acts or orders actions where it's questionable if they fall under the perview of Presidential duties, then the other branches begin an investigation and initiate impeachment actions if needed. After which if said President is found to have acted outside given authority, criminal charges can then be laid.

Sheez. How often are you proven a liar here?

The question was specifically asked if the president could execute a rival. SCOTUS came back with a yes.

 

[TastySuckToy]

No they didn't.

Yes, they did.

The question was specifically asked if the president could execute a rival. SCOTUS came back with a yes.

No, they didn't.

 

[adrina]

Yes, they did.

No, they didn't.

You're just proving how ignorant you are about American law.

Laughing does not change that. So go ahead and laugh - that's what the idiots do.

 

[TastySuckToy]

You're just proving how ignorant you are about American law.

Given the issue is Presidential immunity while engaging in duties of office and you're confusing that with American Law, we can clearly see who is the actual ignorant one here.

 

[HisArpy]

No they didn't. They excluded specific evidence from being considered. They, once again, overstepped their bounds.

No president has needed it before and no president is supposed to have it. That's the way it works in America. Maybe you like to bow down to kings but we do not.

NOT TRUE.

At least not according to the courts.

Or do you think you're above the law and can just do whatever you want out of hatred?

 

[adrina]

Given the issue is Presidential immunity while engaging in duties of office and you're confusing that with American Law, we can clearly see who is the actual ignorant one here.

The fools do indeed laugh. Shrug. Not going to engage in a discussion with you.

But hey our resident carbon water boy along with the Q idiots agree with you. So you have that.

A third rate hack lawyer and a nutjob. Yeah, pass.

 

[TastySuckToy]

The fools do indeed laugh. Shrug. Not going to engage in a discussion with you.

But hey our resident carbon water boy along with the Q idiots agree with you. So you have that.

A third rate hack lawyer and a nutjob. Yeah, pass.

I take it then you assert any and all Presidents should be arrested and convicted for murder at any point they issued orders that had people killed.

After all, no one is above the law, right? And killing people is against the law, especially without fair trials and due process.

 

[adrina]

Yeah. No. Go sealion someone else.

 

[TastySuckToy]

Yeah. No. Go sealion someone else.

In other words, you know Presidents have immunity to things normal people don't.

I gladly accept your concession on the issue.

 

[adrina]

In other words, you know Presidents have immunity to things normal people don't.

I gladly accept your concession on the issue.

You can gladly accept your head up your ass for all it matters.

 

[TastySuckToy]

You can gladly accept your head up your ass for all it matters.

Name calling and crying, the last resort the baby girl getting spanked. Quick, give me another reply, Daddy Tasty orders you.

 

[adrina]

Desperate for attention.

 

[icanhelp1]

You can gladly accept your head up your ass for all it matters.

The immunity ruling will protect Biden from prosecution for dereliction of duty, treasonous behavior for not protecting our national security annd our borders and allowing terrorist entering our country.

 

[adrina]

The immunity ruling will protect Biden from prosecution for dereliction of duty treasonous behavior for not protecting our national security and allowing terrorist entering our country.

Hi traitor!

 

[Bray123]

The chance of President Biden telling his followers to lock themselves in basements and sign forged electoral certificates in order to subvert an election is slim.

That act is why Trump needs immunity and what he will claim was an 'official act'.

The Hush Money case has already stalled and that happened before he was elected President and they are nevertheless claiming it was an 'official act'.