Supreme Court delivers landmark ruling on presidential immunity in Trump case
6th Jan was not an official act - how could it be - when everyone else was rounded up, by CCTV identity camera recordings - and sentenced to prison for terms up to 25 years.
Supreme Court delivers landmark ruling on presidential immunity in Trump case
Washington Bureau Reporter
The Supreme Court today delivered a landmark ruling on presidential immunity in a case involving former President Donald Trump's alleged interference in the 2020 election.
"The nature of presidential power requires that a former president have some immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts during his tenure in office," wrote Chief Justice John Roberts for the majority opinion.
The justices clarified that any president has absolute immunity for core constitutional powers. For official acts, a president is entitled to immunity. However, for unofficial acts, a president has no immunity.
The question now is whether Trump's alleged actions leading up to and on Jan. 6, 2021, were official acts.
Chief Justice John Roberts stated that Trump is "absolutely immune from prosecution for the alleged conduct involving his discussions with Justice Department officials," including threatening to fire the then Attorney General for refusing to investigate voter fraud.
However, when it comes to actions that could be considered unofficial, such as attempts to pressure then Vice President Mike Pence to overturn the election results on Jan. 6, the fake electors scheme, or social media posts encouraging supporters to travel to D.C. on Jan. 6, the majority sent these allegations back to the district court.
The district court is to decide whether Trump is entitled to immunity.
All three liberal justices dissented, with Justice Sonia Sotomayor writing, "Today's decision to grant former Presidents criminal immunity reshapes the institution of the Presidency. It makes a mockery of the principle, foundational to our Constitution and system of Government, that no man is above the law."
"This opinion is very convoluted. It's inconsistent in parts, but it really is going to have a beehive of litigation activity as a result. Not just in this case, but in other cases in the future," said Gene Rossi, a former federal prosecutor.
The case now returns to D.C., where the judge overseeing the trial will determine if the allegations against Trump were official or unofficial acts. Legal experts believe that regardless of the decision, the case will likely end up back before the High Court.
KCRA3
Me: By the will of all the people of America, Biden was elected the new President and Trump was booted out by 6th Jan, so 6th Jan was not an official act - how could it be - when everyone else was rounded up, by CCTV identity camera recordings - and sentenced to prison for terms up to 25 years.
Trump may yet have charges to answer for, on September 18th, when he discovers that no man is above the law.
Hooray for that and for Justice for all, in America.
"where the judge overseeing the trial will determine if the allegations against Trump were official or unofficial acts" - sums it up.
In my opinion Trump's 6th Jan revolt against the combined decision of the people of America, to decide they had enough of Trump and wanted Biden to replace him, was justified and Legal and Trump was booted out by majority vote by the American people, which is how the ongoing Presidency is predetermined. Democracy in action.
That Trump did not like that verdict, is neither here nor there and it gave the former President, who was President no longer, no legal Right to dispute what the people of America had decided, when they voted against him, just the same as all elections everywhere, under Democratic Rules.
Thus Trump had no legal Right to dispute his termination as President, or to be the creator of the 6th Jan riot, because if he had not aroused his followers, "by not being there on 6th Jan", then none of what followed, could have occurred, as it did and like all "good leaders" consistent with his ducking Call Up to fight in Vietnam, according to Berenson who called Trump a Coward, Trump was leading from behind and letting his troops take the fall for him, just the same as he always does.
That does not make the 6th Jan Legal or in this case Right.
In my opinion, Trump should be made an example of and put in Rikers prison, in a protected part of the prison, where he does not need to have Secret Service Protection - a jail cell will keep Trump safe from the other prisoners and Trump could exercise when the other prisoners were in lock down - simple.
Legacy media and democratic party establishment loyalists declaring that the election was unquestionable with no evidence of fraud DOES NOT mean that there was not mountains of evidence of fraud and is unquestionable. It does not require much looking into it to see that reality is the opposite. And this lies at the heart of so many criminal ops committed by this administration and deep state agencies since the lead up to that election. We are being lied to by the powers that be 24/7. They are terrified of a free and honest election. This is made abundantly clear by the fact that they continue to want computerized counting of ballots. The only reason to want computerized voting is because it allows for rigging the outcome.