The president does not have immunity for acts that were not part of official duties. So inciting a riot and stealing government documents would not qualify.
Immunity ruling
- Thread starter middleview
- Start date
It's up to the lower courts to determine what were and we're not official duties.
The judge in DC already ruled that the DC riot was not part of Trump's official duties...neither were the fraudulent electors.
Roberts wrote "the president is not above the law"....
And now the lower courts are tasked with delineating which acts fall under official duties and which do not
worldlymrb
Daddy
Last edited:
as seen on tv
Senator
i tend to agree. but it's surprising the supremes sent the case back to lower court, instead of rendering a full decision. nobody wants their fingerprints on this one. or to create a precedent in case law.
Why lie? That isn't what Hur wrote in his report.
Because someone will have to evaluate the indictment for whether or not it constituted an official act.
Illegally removing classified documents from the White House would not qualify as satisfying any official requirement of office. Neither is calling a mob to attack the capitol or arranging for fraudulent electors.
Bugsy McGurk
President
The SCOTUS con opinion creates a hopelessly circular confusing mess. You say that illegally removing documents is not an official act. Trump denies that removing them was illegal. And if the removal wasn’t illegal it would be an official act by your definition. Around and around it will go.
One can only hope that a rational judge would deny that argument...there are clear regulations about both presidential documents and classified documents. Trump was in violation of the Presidential Records Act as well as the Espionage Act.
How violating those laws becomes an official act is the problem for Trump.
I agree that the decision is entirely too vague. Examples of official vs non-official would have helped. They could easily have used the DC riot or the Mar-a-Lago documents as examples.
Bugsy McGurk
President
Staging a riot is obviously not an official act, but Trump denies doing that. He, backed by the SCOTUS cons, claims that all he did was give a speech, and a speech is an official act enjoying protection. Without the immunity concocted by the SCOTUS cons, the jury decides those questions. Now, such hopelessly circular questions must first be examined by a trial court judge to see if there is an immunity claim, and that ruling then goes up on appeal, with every claim of presidential criminality taking years to decide before there is even a trial, if ever.
This is how authoritarians take control - they have the judiciary in their pocket.
A speech encouraging a violent resistance to a constitutional process is inciting insurrection. Add that to the effort to appoint fraudulent electors and the Eastman plan to stay in power....
I am hoping for the best.
Bugsy McGurk
President
They should have simply decided the case before them, and they should have done it without concocting “presidential immunity rules” out of whole cloth. Crimes are crimes. The Constitution gave presidents no immunity to commit crimes and the nation did just fine for centuries. Concocting presidential immunity to commit some crimes is an abomination. Hackery of the worst kind.
Bugsy McGurk
President
Trump wasn’t even charged with insurrection. And again, he denies encouraging violent resistance. That would have been purely a question for the jury but a prosecutor must now jump through hoops applying the SCOTUS cons’ ridiculously circular “rules” before there is even a trial. Same with the fake elector schemes. Trump will now claim that it was an “official act” to get “alternate” electors appointed to “stop the steal” (which was non-existent), and that it was his duty to make sure that he, as the “real winner,” was recognized. All immunized, he will claim.
Such a disgrace.
So staging a coup/riot in Florida, erecting a gallows is all GTG - OK GOT IT - let's GOP Brandon and get er dun - this time there won't be much of a police force to contend with it any at all.
"Stop the steal" and "Fight like hell" sound like encouraging violence. Proving the intent to implement insurrection seems harder to prove.
"Oh...I just want congress to know we were pissed off"....is his excuse.
EatTheRich
President
What Hur actually found was that Biden did not commit a crime.
Bugsy McGurk
President
Yup. The jury would have decided those questions. But now there must first be ridiculously confusing immunity inquiries under the new rules the SCOTUS cons concocted.
And so it starts...
Donald Trump Says Fake Electors Scheme Was 'Official Act'
MSN
www.msn.com
So having people sign fraudulent documents declaring yourself a legal elector is now an official act. WTF!
Bugsy McGurk
President
Yup. Trump and his lawyers will contend that all his actions designed to reverse the election outcome were “official acts.” Then that gets bogged down in appeals unless Trump gets elected and just wipes out the indictments altogether. That would be the crowning achievement in his lifetime of corruption. The SCOTUS cons will fly their J6 flags high.
