LOL literally posted minutes ago

-->



Nobody said anything about dictatorships full of slaves I just quoted you saying you should check the news

GTFO already liar

You initially quoted a post of mine which was 5 Days old. Sick stalker I should have reported you.

https://forums.d2jsp.org/topic.php?t=88181049&f=119&p=663611175

Seek help LOL

This post was edited by Meanwhile on Jun 28 2024 05:16am

What a massive fail of a post LOL

Good luck comparing the US with dictatorships full of slaves because you cannot handle the latest Biden shit fest

Rekt

"cannot handle" ? Where ? It would be nice if U.S democrats present a new young candidate.
Seekhelp and stop harassin me, Grük. Demolished.

First bold You could've just said that instead of comparing the US with dictatorships full of slaves when I first quoted you, lol

It's your own BS and shitposting netting you the replies that you get

Second bold reported of course

Rekt

Who is this rando?

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-939_e2pg.pdf

Trump v United States

Held: Under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature
of Presidential power entitles a former President to absolute immunity
from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority. And he is entitled to at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts. There is no
immunity for unofficial acts.

/e furthermore:

In dividing official from unofficial conduct, courts may not inquire
into the President’s motives. Such a “highly intrusive” inquiry would
risk exposing even the most obvious instances of official conduct to judicial examination on the mere allegation of improper purpose. Fitzgerald, 457 U. S., at 756. Nor may courts deem an action unofficial
merely because it allegedly violates a generally applicable law. Otherwise, Presidents would be subject to trial on “every allegation that
an action was unlawful,” depriving immunity of its intended effect

They then look at each allegation:


Because the President cannot be prosecuted for conduct within his exclusive constitutional authority, Trump is absolutely immune from prosecution for the
alleged conduct involving his discussions with Justice Department officials.


15. The indictment’s
allegations that Trump attempted to pressure the Vice President to
take particular acts in connection with his role at the certification proceeding thus involve official conduct, and Trump is at least presumptively immune from prosecution for such conduct.
The question then becomes whether that presumption of immunity
is rebutted under the circumstances. It is the Government’s burden to
rebut the presumption of immunity. The Court therefore remands to
the District Court to assess in the first instance whether a prosecution
involving Trump’s alleged attempts to influence the Vice President’s
oversight of the certification proceeding would pose any dangers of intrusion on the authority and functions of the Executive Branch.



The indictment’s remaining allegations involve Trump’s interactions with persons outside the Executive Branch: state officials,
private parties, and the general public
....
The Court accordingly remands to the District Court to determine in
the first instance whether Trump’s conduct in this area qualifies as
official or unofficial.


(iv) The indictment also contains various allegations regarding
Trump’s conduct in connection with the events of January 6 itself. The
alleged conduct largely consists of Trump’s communications in the
form of Tweets and a public address.
....
The Court
therefore remands to the District Court to determine in the first instance whether this alleged conduct is official or unofficial.



Testimony or private records of the President
or his advisers probing such conduct may not be admitted as evidence
at trial.





This post was edited by Goomshill on Jul 1 2024 08:36am

They also really laid on how even in the remanded cases to determine whether his actions were official or unofficial, there's every reason to count them as official and a burden to disprove that, ie;



Any determination by a lower court whether these acts are official or unofficial would of course be individually appealable to the supreme court, since SCOTUS is not making those determinations today.

holy damn