It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is the President immune from a criminal investigation?

page: 3
6
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 24 2019 @ 08:46 AM
link   
a reply to: CriticalStinker

We have Royals over here CriticalStinker who are for all intents and purposes, above the law of the land.

Have to say, it seldom ends well for the little guy.

Can't have one rule for some and another for the rest and expect the majority to follow law.

Then again why do you imagine justice has a blindfold over her eyes?

Money talks, the rest of us simply do the walk if truth be told.




posted on Oct, 24 2019 @ 08:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko

Not exactly. Impeachment is a constitutional process.

Are we confusing state courts and federal ones? I would say he's not immune to prosecution and indictment as soon as he becomes a private citizen again for this particular case.


This isn't about being immune to prosecution or indictment, that's already known and settled. This is about Trump's lawyers making the NEW argument that a President is also immune to investigation.
edit on 10/24/19 by redmage because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 24 2019 @ 08:51 AM
link   
a reply to: DaisyRainbow

Indeed, the UK, however, is not a democracy but a unitary state with devolution that is governed within the framework of a parliamentary democracy under a constitutional monarchy in which the monarch, currently Queen Elizabeth II, is the head of state.

Operative words being "Under" and "Head".

And that just the way our world spins.

It's about as fair really as the hair on my behind, which is to say not at all.
edit on 24-10-2019 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 24 2019 @ 08:57 AM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko




Of course, Republicans can use this tactic too,


They did during the Benghazi hearings. Apparently they changed the rules to do so.



posted on Oct, 24 2019 @ 09:00 AM
link   
a reply to: CriticalStinker

But are the state governments bound by a policy made up by the federal justice dept?
Let's say a guy got into office and it turned out he was a homicidal maniac.. and he was leaving behind him a trail of bodies along with a bunch of witnesses all identifying him as the murderer across multiple states.
Ya, there are federal laws against murder, but most, if not all states have their own laws against murder also. And surely each and every state has the right to protect their residents from being murdered as well as enforce their own laws against it and seek justice for their murdered inhabitants.
Conservative cry "states rights" all the time... and impeachments have usually taken quit some time..
And yet, here they are, supporting the idea that no matter what the transgression is, even murder, the states lose all power to enforce their laws, to even investigate the crimes, to protect their own inhabitants or to seek justice for those harmed... if the crime is committed by someone holding the office of the president.

The only reason that this position has been held as long as it has was because our presidents had enough sense not to stray too far out of the norm and start blatantly breaking laws and telling us to just live with it! Thanks to trump and this argument his lawyers have made, an appeals court has questioned the validity and constitutionality of the actual dept. of justice policy rule.



posted on Oct, 24 2019 @ 09:00 AM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake


For sure! Ain't nobody on our isles can criticise US presidential issues when we are ultimately governed by a queen and #ing lords n ladies Pmsl!!! 😂😂😂

She was nearly dragged into the brexit shenanigans recently ffs, UKGBNI needs to catch up with democracy 🙄



posted on Oct, 24 2019 @ 09:08 AM
link   
a reply to: DaisyRainbow

The Queen is nearly 94 years old all the same DaisyRainbow, probably not sure what day of the week it is nevermind Brexit.

Democracy, no matter its colour or shade, will always be a farce, and simply a prison where we cannot see the bars, whilst the bankers and corporations wag our politicians tail from behind the curtain.

Shenanigan is an apt enough word to cover what they get up to as long as you place "nefarious" before the word.

More like a technocratic oligarchy if we are honest in all the first world nations.



posted on Oct, 24 2019 @ 09:09 AM
link   
a reply to: Stupidsecrets

No, I am not trolling. I have been on this 16 year's with all kinds of ups and downs. Both with ATS and myself personally. To consider this thread troll8ng is an insult imho.

However when you mention Biden out of the blue, that tells me you do not want to have a genuine discussion. That is a deflection to the the issue here.

The quote from Trump's lawyer that is concerning:


Trump’s lawyers argued that “the person who serves as President, while in office, enjoys absolute immunity from criminal process of any kind.”


That is the argument of a tyrant, not a president bound by the Constitution.



posted on Oct, 24 2019 @ 09:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: jhn7537
Laughable OP.... So this is a constitutional crisis, but the left/deep state attempting a coup is what, business as usual???? If anything is a constitutional crisis, its the Coup that's been going on since the Dems lost in 2016 to big bad orange man.


It absolutely is. We have a sitting president and his lawyers claiming the President is above the law, above being investigated and using this argument to reject any investigation into the President.

Do you understand what Checks and Balances are in terms of the United States government?



posted on Oct, 24 2019 @ 09:18 AM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake

Yes, I agree 😢
If we take an extreme like North Korea, it would be listed on TripAdvisor as 0 rating, and with the smallest cells, crappy food, limited activities or entertainment. UKGBNI however would be rated a lot higher, but as you say just a nicer prison.
I kinda accepted it years ago, not like there's much I can do about it lol



posted on Oct, 24 2019 @ 09:50 AM
link   


This is absolutely insane and in my opinion represents a serious Constitutional crisis and is a threat to our Republic.


Want to try again ?

Everything the current majority in Congress has done has been criminal.

Violations of conduct and ethics, and they get a free pass.

Not to mention they can't be prosecuted for the snip they write.



posted on Oct, 24 2019 @ 10:09 AM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar

That's the issue with me. If it's found that the President is immune from investigation and prosecution what's to stop them from murdering their political rivals and installing themselves as permanent ruler? Thereby making sure they'll always be above the law?

All it would require is two complicit branches of government. I think people are fooling themselves if they think this isn't a possibility. What Donald Trump has done is expose a giant weakness in our system. That our democracy is predicated on good faith. All it takes is someone who isn't operating on good faith for the entire thing to fail.

I'm really hoping the courts decide that the President isn't above the law. If they rule he is, America is lost. Because while Donald Trumps blatant criminality isn't at the level of killing people and assuming lifelong rule just yet, eventually someone will come along who will exploit the system to give themselves total power. And they will now know it's possible.



posted on Oct, 24 2019 @ 10:10 AM
link   
a reply to: neo96

UK Members of parliament have something I think is called parliamentary privilege, so while speaking in the house of commons they can slander anyone they like with no legal comeback from the slandered person or entity.
It is not often used and can be controversial when they do, but they have a similar protection in law when speaking in the house.
Words which become part of official record in Hansard



posted on Oct, 24 2019 @ 10:12 AM
link   
a reply to: jrod

Yes, he is I think. They can investigate the crime, and if they get enough evidence then the President needs to be impeached.



posted on Oct, 24 2019 @ 10:15 AM
link   
a reply to: underwerks

So all it takes is to disarmed citizens and have the government turn against the people. You say that as if that's something that happens easily.

If the government is working with the President to create a dictatorship what rivals does he have at that point? It's a nonsense post.



posted on Oct, 24 2019 @ 10:17 AM
link   
a reply to: jrod

False. They are not claiming he is above the law. They are claiming there is a system of checks and balances that are in place to allow the President to run the country like he needs to while allowing for his removal if he does something wrong.

What you can't do is say we aren't removing you but we are going to make you answer questions all day every day and prevent you from doing your job.



posted on Oct, 24 2019 @ 10:19 AM
link   
a reply to: jrod

You keep forgetting this part in your posts, why is that?


“Would we have to wait for an impeachment proceeding to be initiated?” he said.


Tyrants don't get impeached. When they claim impeachment does not exist and Trump is a forever President and can never be removed by any process let me know.



posted on Oct, 24 2019 @ 10:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: dawnstar
Let's say a guy got into office and it turned out he was a homicidal maniac.. and he was leaving behind him a trail of bodies along with a bunch of witnesses all identifying him as the murderer across multiple states.

Then you impeach him. Why is that so difficult to understand?



posted on Oct, 24 2019 @ 10:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: underwerks

So all it takes is to disarmed citizens and have the government turn against the people. You say that as if that's something that happens easily.

If the government is working with the President to create a dictatorship what rivals does he have at that point? It's a nonsense post.


What are armed citizens going to do when they are the ones supporting the government take over? Whether citizens are armed or not has nothing to do with what the President would be capable of in this instance. Sorry, your assault rifles dont mean anything when it's the government we're talking about.

We would only need what we're seeing right now to enable a person to kill off their rivals and take over the government. Namely the unconditional support of two branches of government.

This is a real threat, and your outdated view on the 2nd amendment doesn't protect anyone from a totalitarian government.
edit on 24-10-2019 by underwerks because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 24 2019 @ 10:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: jrod

You keep forgetting this part in your posts, why is that?


“Would we have to wait for an impeachment proceeding to be initiated?” he said.


Tyrants don't get impeached. When they claim impeachment does not exist and Trump is a forever President and can never be removed by any process let me know.


By then it would be too late. And we're already seeing the push to make impeachment invalid regarding Donald Trump.

They are literally arguing that the President can't be investigated or prosecuted, which by extension means he can't be removed through impeachment either.


That's the issue.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join