(02-06-2024 01:30 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-06-2024 01:18 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(02-06-2024 01:13 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-06-2024 12:21 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  I told you guys PanPan was DingDong

LULZ. You run to your demoted piss tester for Constitutional matters and analysis.

I didnt. He's just posting what the other constitutional scholars are scoffing at right now.

Trump as president on Jan 6th, not a citizen. PanPan says he was a citizen. The constitution says he was president.

PanPan make TomTom sound DumbDumb. Not that the bar was that high to pull off.

Since dumb dumb can't read apparently, the issue is that CITIZEN trump was indicted. He doesn't have presidential immunity as a citizen.

Further, you're basically arguing that a president can commit any crime he wants while in office and not be prosecuted later for it.

THAT is not gonna fly by any scholarly analysis of the Constitution.

And before you trot old your stupid old Obama talking point, by all means, prosecute him. I don't give a rats ass if you want to waste time and money on such frivolity.

And lastly, if SCOTUS wanted to kick this, they would have done so without sending it back. So, they'll either take it and deny the claim like the appeals court did, or my guess, they won't even take it. It would look worse for trump when them come back with a 7-2 ruling or worse.

If it did I would love to read the dissenting opinion of the “2”.

(02-06-2024 01:33 PM)Mr_XcentricK Wrote:  

(02-06-2024 01:30 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-06-2024 01:18 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(02-06-2024 01:13 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-06-2024 12:21 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  I told you guys PanPan was DingDong

LULZ. You run to your demoted piss tester for Constitutional matters and analysis.

I didnt. He's just posting what the other constitutional scholars are scoffing at right now.

Trump as president on Jan 6th, not a citizen. PanPan says he was a citizen. The constitution says he was president.

PanPan make TomTom sound DumbDumb. Not that the bar was that high to pull off.

Since dumb dumb can't read apparently, the issue is that CITIZEN trump was indicted. He doesn't have presidential immunity as a citizen.

Further, you're basically arguing that a president can commit any crime he wants while in office and not be prosecuted later for it.

THAT is not gonna fly by any scholarly analysis of the Constitution.

And before you trot old your stupid old Obama talking point, by all means, prosecute him. I don't give a rats ass if you want to waste time and money on such frivolity.

And lastly, if SCOTUS wanted to kick this, they would have done so without sending it back. So, they'll either take it and deny the claim like the appeals court did, or my guess, they won't even take it. It would look worse for trump when them come back with a 7-2 ruling or worse.

If it did I would love to read the dissenting opinion of the “2”.

It would be Alito and Thomas...so you don't have to think too hard to imagine how idiotic it would be.

(02-06-2024 01:30 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-06-2024 01:18 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(02-06-2024 01:13 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-06-2024 12:21 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  I told you guys PanPan was DingDong

LULZ. You run to your demoted piss tester for Constitutional matters and analysis.

I didnt. He's just posting what the other constitutional scholars are scoffing at right now.

Trump as president on Jan 6th, not a citizen. PanPan says he was a citizen. The constitution says he was president.

PanPan make TomTom sound DumbDumb. Not that the bar was that high to pull off.

Since dumb dumb can't read apparently, the issue is that CITIZEN trump was indicted. He doesn't have presidential immunity as a citizen.

Further, you're basically arguing that a president can commit any crime he wants while in office and not be prosecuted later for it.

THAT is not gonna fly by any scholarly analysis of the Constitution.

And before you trot old your stupid old Obama talking point, by all means, prosecute him. I don't give a rats ass if you want to waste time and money on such frivolity.

And lastly, if SCOTUS wanted to kick this, they would have done so without sending it back. So, they'll either take it and deny the claim like the appeals court did, or my guess, they won't even take it. It would look worse for trump when them come back with a 7-2 ruling or worse.

"the issue is that CITIZEN trump was indicted. He doesn't have presidential immunity as a citizen"

That's one stupid comment right there. Do you ever think before you Post something or do you just copy and paste stuff you read?

(02-06-2024 02:21 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  

(02-06-2024 01:30 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-06-2024 01:18 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(02-06-2024 01:13 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-06-2024 12:21 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  I told you guys PanPan was DingDong

LULZ. You run to your demoted piss tester for Constitutional matters and analysis.

I didnt. He's just posting what the other constitutional scholars are scoffing at right now.

Trump as president on Jan 6th, not a citizen. PanPan says he was a citizen. The constitution says he was president.

PanPan make TomTom sound DumbDumb. Not that the bar was that high to pull off.

Since dumb dumb can't read apparently, the issue is that CITIZEN trump was indicted. He doesn't have presidential immunity as a citizen.

Further, you're basically arguing that a president can commit any crime he wants while in office and not be prosecuted later for it.

THAT is not gonna fly by any scholarly analysis of the Constitution.

And before you trot old your stupid old Obama talking point, by all means, prosecute him. I don't give a rats ass if you want to waste time and money on such frivolity.

And lastly, if SCOTUS wanted to kick this, they would have done so without sending it back. So, they'll either take it and deny the claim like the appeals court did, or my guess, they won't even take it. It would look worse for trump when them come back with a 7-2 ruling or worse.

"the issue is that CITIZEN trump was indicted. He doesn't have presidential immunity as a citizen"

That's one stupid comment right there. Do you ever think before you Post something or do you just copy and paste stuff you read?

He is a citizen before he is President. For the sake of argument, if he has presidential immunity then why are you guys crying so much about Biden? He would have presidential immunity too right?

(02-06-2024 02:30 PM)Mr_XcentricK Wrote:  

(02-06-2024 02:21 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  

(02-06-2024 01:30 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-06-2024 01:18 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(02-06-2024 01:13 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  LULZ. You run to your demoted piss tester for Constitutional matters and analysis.

I didnt. He's just posting what the other constitutional scholars are scoffing at right now.

Trump as president on Jan 6th, not a citizen. PanPan says he was a citizen. The constitution says he was president.

PanPan make TomTom sound DumbDumb. Not that the bar was that high to pull off.

Since dumb dumb can't read apparently, the issue is that CITIZEN trump was indicted. He doesn't have presidential immunity as a citizen.

Further, you're basically arguing that a president can commit any crime he wants while in office and not be prosecuted later for it.

THAT is not gonna fly by any scholarly analysis of the Constitution.

And before you trot old your stupid old Obama talking point, by all means, prosecute him. I don't give a rats ass if you want to waste time and money on such frivolity.

And lastly, if SCOTUS wanted to kick this, they would have done so without sending it back. So, they'll either take it and deny the claim like the appeals court did, or my guess, they won't even take it. It would look worse for trump when them come back with a 7-2 ruling or worse.

"the issue is that CITIZEN trump was indicted. He doesn't have presidential immunity as a citizen"

That's one stupid comment right there. Do you ever think before you Post something or do you just copy and paste stuff you read?

He is a citizen before he is President. For the sake of argument, if he has presidential immunity then why are you guys crying so much about Biden? He would have presidential immunity too right?

President Trump was the President of the USA on 6 Jan. Biden was not President of the USA when he obtained and kept classified documents for his personal benefit.

You are right on one thing. Trump was a United States citizen before he became the President and now he is a citizen of the USA. But like I said, he was the President on the 6th.

(02-06-2024 03:12 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  

(02-06-2024 02:30 PM)Mr_XcentricK Wrote:  

(02-06-2024 02:21 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  

(02-06-2024 01:30 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-06-2024 01:18 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  I didnt. He's just posting what the other constitutional scholars are scoffing at right now.

Trump as president on Jan 6th, not a citizen. PanPan says he was a citizen. The constitution says he was president.

PanPan make TomTom sound DumbDumb. Not that the bar was that high to pull off.

Since dumb dumb can't read apparently, the issue is that CITIZEN trump was indicted. He doesn't have presidential immunity as a citizen.

Further, you're basically arguing that a president can commit any crime he wants while in office and not be prosecuted later for it.

THAT is not gonna fly by any scholarly analysis of the Constitution.

And before you trot old your stupid old Obama talking point, by all means, prosecute him. I don't give a rats ass if you want to waste time and money on such frivolity.

And lastly, if SCOTUS wanted to kick this, they would have done so without sending it back. So, they'll either take it and deny the claim like the appeals court did, or my guess, they won't even take it. It would look worse for trump when them come back with a 7-2 ruling or worse.

"the issue is that CITIZEN trump was indicted. He doesn't have presidential immunity as a citizen"

That's one stupid comment right there. Do you ever think before you Post something or do you just copy and paste stuff you read?

He is a citizen before he is President. For the sake of argument, if he has presidential immunity then why are you guys crying so much about Biden? He would have presidential immunity too right?

President Trump was the President of the USA on 6 Jan. Biden was not President of the USA when he obtained and kept classified documents for his personal benefit.

You are right on one thing. Trump was a United States citizen before he became the President and now he is a citizen of the USA. But like I said, he was the President on the 6th.

Cool. So we agree Trump does don’t have an argument for the boxes of documents he had. And there is no such thing as presidential immunity. If there was wouldn’t Nixon have used it? Or is just a new interpretation of the Constitution which conservatives say is written in stone?

(02-06-2024 03:20 PM)Mr_XcentricK Wrote:  

(02-06-2024 03:12 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  

(02-06-2024 02:30 PM)Mr_XcentricK Wrote:  

(02-06-2024 02:21 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  

(02-06-2024 01:30 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Since dumb dumb can't read apparently, the issue is that CITIZEN trump was indicted. He doesn't have presidential immunity as a citizen.

Further, you're basically arguing that a president can commit any crime he wants while in office and not be prosecuted later for it.

THAT is not gonna fly by any scholarly analysis of the Constitution.

And before you trot old your stupid old Obama talking point, by all means, prosecute him. I don't give a rats ass if you want to waste time and money on such frivolity.

And lastly, if SCOTUS wanted to kick this, they would have done so without sending it back. So, they'll either take it and deny the claim like the appeals court did, or my guess, they won't even take it. It would look worse for trump when them come back with a 7-2 ruling or worse.

"the issue is that CITIZEN trump was indicted. He doesn't have presidential immunity as a citizen"

That's one stupid comment right there. Do you ever think before you Post something or do you just copy and paste stuff you read?

He is a citizen before he is President. For the sake of argument, if he has presidential immunity then why are you guys crying so much about Biden? He would have presidential immunity too right?

President Trump was the President of the USA on 6 Jan. Biden was not President of the USA when he obtained and kept classified documents for his personal benefit.

You are right on one thing. Trump was a United States citizen before he became the President and now he is a citizen of the USA. But like I said, he was the President on the 6th.

Cool. So we agree Trump does don’t have an argument for the boxes of documents he had. And there is no such thing as presidential immunity. If there was wouldn’t Nixon have used it? Or is just a new interpretation of the Constitution which conservatives say is written in stone?

I see you are someone that doesn't think before he makes a Post.

So, the 3 panel stupidity says that Trump can ask for an en banc, but they will allow Chutkin to proceed with the case while that is ongoing. He would have to appeal straight to the SC in order to keep the hold in place.

However, that doesnt fly. They are not allowed to depose, get documents, etc, until the immunity is resolved. What I could see happening is that Trump calls for an enbanc, and appeals the "if you try for an en banc we will allow the trial to continue" ruling, and if the SC doesnt want to do that, just send the appeal to the SC.

Its clear the the 3 panel judge is trying to fast track this as much as possible.

In the end, it doesnt really matter. It is unlikely the SC would give any decision prior to the election. They are not going to be wanting to give a decision under duress of an election. At the same time, they certainly arent going to refuse to hear it either.