- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: If He Needs to, Can Obama Successfully Claim "Presidential Immunity" For His Crimes?
Posted on 7/22/25 at 10:21 am to jimmy the leg
Posted on 7/22/25 at 10:21 am to jimmy the leg
quote:
I gave you the pathway for jurisdiction.
No. I've asked you 2-3 times for this and you declined.
quote:
You are choosing to ignore it because it undermines your stance.
Not ignoring and responding directly to it
quote:
How did this apply, specifically? Cite the relevant portions of the code and the contemporary statuses/decisions/behaviors that apply.
Not ignoring and responding directly to it, a second time
quote:
Now we've come full circle on you not answering. I'll ask, again:
How did this apply, specifically? Cite the relevant portions of the code and the contemporary statuses/decisions/behaviors that apply.
The ball is in your court now to answer
0
Posted on 7/22/25 at 10:28 am to northshorebamaman
quote:
quote: There is no presidential immunity when he is OUT of office.
So, his actions, communications, etc. after Trump’s inauguration are the keys to downtown.
This is the way.
Yes
But if it gets to the point that he claims immunity
We’ve already won and everybody is else under him will go down
Hopefully
Posted on 7/22/25 at 10:42 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
The CIC is a civilian and not subject to the UCMJ
This is incorrect as defined by the UCMJ. I noted it for you.
quote:
Any wartime provision is not only irrelevant (as there was no such wartime to trigger the status),
So we weren’t at war in Afghanistan?
Does Congress declaring “War on Terrorism” apply?
If so, who defines what / whom a terrorist is?
quote:
Further, the "Unified Executive" defines all of these terms at his will/pleasure. This authority has been hyper-inflated since January 17, 2025. So if Obama declared Russia to be an enemy per intel statutes/regs, then he has unfettered ability to do so. He can interpret any intel he receives how he wishes and order the agencies under his command to act, without possibly even judicial oversight
Russians aren’t US citizens, and as such, are irrelevant to my post.
quote:
All of these actions are core Executive functions, also, which the Supreme Court has declared gives him absolute immunity from prosecution.
So if the Supremacy Clause gives absolute immunity, why blame Trump?
Obama could be arrested and tried under the UCMJ. The pathway exists. Given that the UCMJ is federal, it has a greater chance of challenging the Supremacy Clause.
Needless to say, the USSC would (likely) hear the immediate appeal.
The USSC would, by its subsequent decision, either codify absolute immunity via affirmation of the Supremacy Clause, or create a new avenue of Presidential prosecution allowed via only the UCMJ.
It would be uncharted territory.
However, I repeat, the pathway exists.
I won’t even go into Martial Law.
Posted on 7/22/25 at 10:56 am to jimmy the leg
quote:
This is incorrect as defined by the UCMJ. I noted it for you.
It is correct and you incorrectly cited the UCMJ
quote:
So we weren’t at war in Afghanistan?
What does that have to do with possible Russian interference with the election, exactly?
quote:
Does Congress declaring “War on Terrorism” apply?
No.
quote:
If so, who defines what / whom a terrorist is?
In this case Obama. Unilaterally (in the current legal regime)
quote:
Russians aren’t US citizens, and as such, are irrelevant to my post.
So which US citizens we were at war with?
You tried to loop in Afghanistan in this post, and then try to play the "citizen" card to avoid a direct comment on the actual issues with Russia.
quote:
So if the Supremacy Clause gives absolute immunity,
That's not what gives the President absolute immunity
Separation of Powers, does.
quote:
why blame Trump?
Who is blaming Trump?
quote:
Obama could be arrested and tried under the UCMJ. T
He cannot.
He would be absolutely immune, regardless.
How can the laws regulating the military override the Constitution?
Posted on 7/22/25 at 12:48 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
He won’t be charged with anything but if he is, Trump v United States is very clear that a president cannot be prosecuted for anything done while he is president.
That is completely false. The people who supply you with information are lying to you.
Posted on 7/22/25 at 2:13 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
You tried to loop in Afghanistan in this post, and then try to play the "citizen" card to avoid a direct comment on the actual issues with Russia.
We are at war with Russia?
quote:
How can the laws regulating the military override the Constitution?
I noted that I didn’t believe that would be the case, and the USSC would have to make that determination in my hypothetical.
Posted on 7/22/25 at 2:55 pm to jimmy the leg
quote:
The USSC would, by its subsequent decision, either codify absolute immunity
Well, with absolute immunity, Trump could just shoot Obama himself and get away with it by this board's standards.....so, I guess Trump can't lose.
Posted on 7/22/25 at 2:56 pm to KCT
I would argue that acts he is being accused of clearly does not fall under what the Court laid out in the Trump case.
At all.
He should not have immunity (but probably would because...)
Not that it will ever get close to this.
At all.
He should not have immunity (but probably would because...)
Not that it will ever get close to this.
Page 10 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News