13 Comments

Intentionally vague, UNCONSTITUTIONAL, legislation from the Bench.

The second and third, all this court does. When it’s not soliciting or accepting bribes, violating the Oath of Office, and side gig seditious BS.

Expand full comment

“The Court ruled that Trump is immune from criminal liability for using the Justice Department to convince State’s to use his illegitimate electors instead of their legitimate ones, based on the separation of powers and that this was an official act.”

Sincere question. You don’t agree with that, right?

Expand full comment

To me, it’s a matter of what constitutes an official act. I can’t say whether I agree or not as I’m not exactly sure what official acts would fall into their constitutionally defined Executive powers.

Expand full comment

"The Court ruled that Trump is immune from criminal liability for using the Justice Department to convince State’s to use his illegitimate electors instead of their legitimate ones, ..."

Creative writing? I have zero recollection of this. Please elaborate.

Expand full comment

Its wording pulled right from the decision.

Expand full comment

Do you have a copy of the official decision?

Expand full comment

Thanks for clarifying. In the furball of the last several years, I had lost track of what the actual indictment was about.

Expand full comment

This will go on for a long time IMO past Nov elections

Expand full comment

This is really how it should be unless you want chaos every time a different party takes the office.

Expand full comment

Exactly!

Expand full comment

WUT? Immunity from espionage, sedition, inciting, obstruction, conspiracy?

What about child rape?

Expand full comment

I think this idea that anything and everything will be exempt from criminal prosecution is not even in alignment with the ruling at all.

Expand full comment