Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
"Faithless" Supreme Court
"Faithless" Supreme Court
#1
Ooooh, I'm snickering about this.

So much for the president's — any U.S. president's — "absolute immunity."  Even the Justices he himself nominated turned against the Dotard's monarchical claims.  What?  Have they no obsequious loyalty to America's Chosen God-King?  Heresy and blasphemy!  Bwa-ha-ha-ha-ha!
-----
"The Lady of the Lake, her arm clad in the purest shimmering samite, held aloft Excalibur from the bosom of the water, signifying by divine providence that this was some killer weed."
Reply
RE: "Faithless" Supreme Court
#2
Woah. They went all the way back to Aaron Burr - who fought in the American Revolution - for their earliest supporting case law.

So much for the Nicknamer-in-Chief's complaints that he's being treated differently than other officeholders in the executive branch. Granted, Burr only made it to Vice-President, but the precedent is still there. His Orangeness is being treated the same way that your "Founding Fathers" were treated.

The law applies to serving politicians. Good to know.
--
Rob Kelk

Since it's an election year in the USA: How to Immigrate to Canada, direct from the Government of Canada's website. "How you can immigrate to Canada, how to protect yourself from fraud and what to expect after you arrive in Canada."
Reply
RE: "Faithless" Supreme Court
#3
Umm, the case in question was a supoena for PRESIDENT Jeffersons records, even more damning. In short, as they say, Mr Trump has no more special protections than any other citizen as long as it does not appear the separation of power in each branch is affected. In short, the ginger in cheif needs to prove this is more of a move against that separation than against the egoist he is
Hear that thunder rolling till it seems to rock the sky?
Thats' every ship in Grayson's Navy taking up the cry!
NO QUARTER!

No Quarter by Echo's Children
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)