Supreme Court Immunity Decision

[wing2000]

And that is all it takes.......

The Heritage Foundation and others are making sure that will not happen again. There's a full out effort to vet employees across Federal agencies.

Project 2025: This is a $22 million initiative led by the Heritage Foundation to create a database of potential conservative candidates for staffing the White House and federal agencies if a Republican wins the presidency in 2024. The goal is to have up to 20,000 vetted conservative personnel ready by the end of 2024.

Heritage Foundation Makes Plans to Staff Next G.O.P. Administration (Published 2023)

No matter the Republican, the effort has set a goal of up to 20,000 potential officials in a database akin to a right-wing LinkedIn.

www.nytimes.com

Former PPO Director John McEntee Joins Project 2025; Personnel Database Launches

WASHINGTON—John McEntee, former director of the White House Presidential Personnel Office in the Trump administration, is joining the 2025 Presidential Transition Project (Project 2025) as a senior advisor. The Heritage Foundation announced McEntee’s new role Tuesday as it unveiled the...

www.heritage.org

 

[durangodawood]

You need to spend time learning the US Constitution and its' checks and balances......
The Constitution gives Congress the authority to impeach and remove the President,1 Vice President, and all federal civil officers for treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.2

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artII-S4-1-1/ALDE_00000282/

See # 55

Yes: impeach. No: criminally prosecute.

I think you should explore the constitution a bit and look at where it says impeachment explicitly does not immunize the pres from criminal charges.

 

[civilwarbuff]

The Heritage Foundation and others are making sure that will not happen again. There's a full out effort to vet employees across Federal agencies.

Project 2025: This is a $22 million initiative led by the Heritage Foundation to create a database of potential conservative candidates for staffing the White House and federal agencies if a Republican wins the presidency in 2024. The goal is to have up to 20,000 vetted conservative personnel ready by the end of 2024.

Heritage Foundation Makes Plans to Staff Next G.O.P. Administration (Published 2023)

No matter the Republican, the effort has set a goal of up to 20,000 potential officials in a database akin to a right-wing LinkedIn.

www.nytimes.com

Former PPO Director John McEntee Joins Project 2025; Personnel Database Launches

WASHINGTON—John McEntee, former director of the White House Presidential Personnel Office in the Trump administration, is joining the 2025 Presidential Transition Project (Project 2025) as a senior advisor. The Heritage Foundation announced McEntee’s new role Tuesday as it unveiled the...

www.heritage.org

WOW, 20,000, huh....
2,186,296 FTE's employed by the Federal Gov.
https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R43590 Page 4

So the Heritage Foundation is gonna try to get 1% of them replaced. Whoa, what a difference that will make.
Sounds more like a return to the old spoils systems. Why do I get the feeling that the dems do very similar things?

 

[civilwarbuff]

I think you should explore the constitution a bit and look at where it says impeachment explicitly does not immunize the pres from criminal charges.

Because it does not say that......ANYWHERE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yes: impeach. No: criminally prosecute.

At least you understand that much.....Sheesh.......

 

[essentialsaltes]

Because it does not say that......ANYWHERE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Judgement in Cases of Impreachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgement and Punishment, according to Law.

Durangodawood is correct that

impeachment explicitly does not immunize the pres from criminal charges.

 

[durangodawood]

Durangodawood is correct that

Because it does not say that......ANYWHERE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

In buffs defense, I didn't know this either until you pointed it out.

But I certainly would have looked into the matter prior to deploying a platoon of exclamation points either way.

 

[Pommer]

What Trump’s lawyers are arguing is that if a President plainly and openly solicits bribes for pardons, and the Congress doesn’t impeach (and the senate does not convict, since there’s no action to be taken without an impeachment from the House), then there can be no subsequent legal action taken against such a situated President once he leaves the Office.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Use a private email server to carry out official acts.

Tear up official presidential documents and stuff them in a toilet.

Let's get creative!

 

[durangodawood]

Use a private email server to carry out official acts.

Haha. So much for Lock Her Up!

Now were telling the exec in advance that whatever such laws might have governed your duties, they no longer apply!!!!!!!!!1

 

[NxNW]

If pardoning someone is an "official act" (and it's hard for me to see how it isn't, as an explicit constitutional power of the office of the presidency), then Roberts' decision makes that official act immune to prosecution, regardless of any corrupt motivation.

So when Trump and Guiliani were offering to sell pardons for $2M, that's totally what the Founding Fathers had in mind!

 

[wing2000]

WOW, 20,000, huh....
2,186,296 FTE's employed by the Federal Gov.
https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R43590 Page 4

So the Heritage Foundation is gonna try to get 1% of them replaced. Whoa, what a difference that will make.
Sounds more like a return to the old spoils systems. Why do I get the feeling that the dems do very similar things?

...eh, do you think they're targeting the person processing your passport application?

 

[civilwarbuff]

Durangodawood is correct that

And who disagreed with him?.....not me.

 

[civilwarbuff]

What Trump’s lawyers are arguing is that if a President plainly and openly solicits bribes for pardons, and the Congress doesn’t impeach (and the senate does not convict, since there’s no action to be taken without an impeachment from the House), then there can be no subsequent legal action taken against such a situated President once he leaves the Office.

Except no where does the law say that. Failure to impeach does not preclude ability to prosecute after leaving office. A bribe is illegal independent of impeachment. I do not believe his lawyers are making such an argument.

 

[civilwarbuff]

...eh, do you think they're targeting the person processing your passport application?

And you have evidence they are not?

 

[essentialsaltes]

Except no where does the law say that. Failure to impeach does not preclude ability to prosecute after leaving office.

SCOTUS didn't say the president is temporarily immune, but absolutely immune.

 

[civilwarbuff]

SCOTUS didn't say the president is temporarily immune, but absolutely immune.

Only in certain circumstances. They have limited immunity in most others.

 

[Pommer]

Except no where does the law say that. Failure to impeach does not preclude ability to prosecute after leaving office. A bribe is illegal independent of impeachment. I do not believe his lawyers are making such an argument.

The oral argument in this case suggests otherwise, but if one forms one’s opinion based on how best Trump can look, one might see something different?

 

[wing2000]

And you have evidence they are not?

Common sense. Senior mangement positions would be the obvious target.

 

[civilwarbuff]

SCOTUS didn't say the president is temporarily immune, but absolutely immune.

The crime is independent of whatever benefit given. They are not mutually dependent.

 

[civilwarbuff]

Common sense. Senior mangement positions would be the obvious target.

So how would they force subordinates to violate the law?