Australia's largest stock trading and investment forum Australia's #1 stock forum

The assumption was they had immunity for official duties of the...

First 8221 Last

Share
Profile

Follow
Tarvold

18,482 Posts.

1202

27/04/24

09:41

Post #: 73534862
Share

Originally posted by hersuit: ↑

If you had a clue you'd recognise EVERY POTUS has operated under the assumption they had the immunity. No doubt about it and the convention that has been in place since the beginning of time was to respect that and do not reduce the power of the Office and set up a never-ending cycle of a tit-for-tat

As the SCOTUS are far brighter than you.... they pointed that out in their questions

The difference with this situation is the Dems - as they have shown a propensity to do - don't give a rat's ass about conventions, procedures, rules or the traditions of how things work. They see an opening... they'll rip the thing apart to gain their point. TDS is a most insidious disease.

Despicable POS in my view without a care for the damage they cause.

You can thank me later for the civics eduction you needed.

Expand

The assumption was they had immunity for official duties of the Ofice of President not blanket immunity.
Only wannabe dictator Trump assumed he had total immunity.

You only claim immunity if you know you have committed a crime.
7 Upvote

Reply

There are more pages in this discussion • 1,020 more messages in this thread...

First 8221 Last

SPONSORED BY