- 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: Should Joe Biden be immune from prosecution for taking bribes while in office?
Posted on 1/6/24 at 2:07 pm to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 1/6/24 at 2:07 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
He only filed one saying that he's absolutely immune from the prosecution.
If he wins, then Biden wins (in the short term).
In the long run, a re-elected Trump would be immune from “prosecution” as you are putting it forth.
Thoughts?
This post was edited on 1/6/24 at 2:29 pm
0
Posted on 1/6/24 at 3:36 pm to SlowFlowPro
No answer?
Posted on 1/6/24 at 3:39 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
So he can kill any opposing Rep/Senator who would vote to impeach or remove him, and he'd be immune for those murders?
I think this thread is the perfect example of an omphaloskeptic SFP thread.
Posted on 1/6/24 at 3:46 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Should Joe Biden be immune from prosecution for taking bribes while in office?
quote:Oh gosh
What about taking bribes after he's in office?
What did Trump do now?
Posted on 1/6/24 at 3:46 pm to the808bass
I think the Nixon vs. Fitzgerald logic would hold here. That was civil not a criminal case but it said immunity was applicable as long as the activity had some connection to an official presidential duty. And it seemed that what was official was very liberally applied.
But safe to say that murdering your political opponents is not an official presidential duty.
Posted on 1/6/24 at 3:48 pm to SlowFlowPro
I knew exactly what this was an attempt at before even clicking this overdose of ignorance
Posted on 1/6/24 at 3:58 pm to SlowFlowPro
No, not while in office. There is only one legal remedy, barring incapacitation and 25th amendment, and that is impeachment by 5he house and conviction by the Senate.
Now that the courts have ruled against presidential immunity surviving the office he's fair game for both the feds and every state the millisecond a new president is sworn in. This is the FAFO they will regret.
Now that the courts have ruled against presidential immunity surviving the office he's fair game for both the feds and every state the millisecond a new president is sworn in. This is the FAFO they will regret.
Posted on 1/6/24 at 4:26 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:Needs clarification. Does this mean taking bribes during his term? Or does it mean prosecuted during his term?
Should Joe Biden be immune from prosecution for taking bribes while in office?
Posted on 1/6/24 at 4:28 pm to Taxing Authority
Hold up. Let him cook. No questions needed.
Posted on 1/6/24 at 4:30 pm to I20goon
The President should have broad immunity for actions taken in office and be protected from prosecution for actions while not in office when holding the office of the President.
If we think the President should be prosecuted for something they did while not in office then they should be impeached and brought up on charges.
If we think the President should be prosecuted for something they did while in office they should be impeached for the specific action and then face prosecution for it.
The system has ways to handle it.
If the President is trying to do something heinous then the cabinet has a way to potentially stop it.
If we think the President should be prosecuted for something they did while not in office then they should be impeached and brought up on charges.
If we think the President should be prosecuted for something they did while in office they should be impeached for the specific action and then face prosecution for it.
The system has ways to handle it.
If the President is trying to do something heinous then the cabinet has a way to potentially stop it.
Posted on 1/6/24 at 4:37 pm to SlowFlowPro
I stopped following all of the lawfare bs. It just makes me angry. Which case is he arguing he has immunity? I get the premise and I don’t think accepting bribes should get immunity. Granted, I haven’t researched the basis for the claim. I think it may be applicable if it is a charge that is a stretch.
Posted on 1/6/24 at 4:58 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
How is the chief executive officer of the government capable of overthrowing himself?
quote:
What does that have to do with bribes?
Means he has immunity from "Insurrection", because he can't insurrect himself.
Posted on 1/6/24 at 4:59 pm to TrueTiger
quote:
Impeachment conviction lifts immunity.
quote:
but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.
I don't think that language creates a requirement of impeachment for prosecution.
It just clarifies that they are 2 different things and impeachment doesn't absolve a removed President from prosecution
Posted on 1/6/24 at 5:01 pm to Taxing Authority
quote:
Needs clarification. Does this mean taking bribes during his term? Or does it mean prosecuted during his term?
There have been arguments Presidents can't be liable for criminal acts after holding office, if they're somehow related to privileges afforded former Presidents, which is why I used that language (and the follow up in OP).
This post was edited on 1/6/24 at 5:01 pm
Posted on 1/6/24 at 5:04 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
Which case is he arguing he has immunity?
I'm going to assume he files in all of them (except the NY business records one), but this is the appeal Jack Smith tried to fast track to the USSC for the DC case, that's now at the circuit appellate level.
Of all the criminal prosecutions, this is the one the argument is strongest for possible immunity, because he was still in office, is trying to invent the "impeachment" requirement (and was impeached on this issue), and can also argue this is somewhat related to his role as President. The RICO case probably won't work b/c it's a state-based charge and the Florida case involves behaviors well after he was President.
Posted on 1/6/24 at 5:05 pm to the808bass
quote:
I think this thread is the perfect example of an omphaloskeptic SFP thread.
Absolute immunity means absolute immunity.
Posted on 1/6/24 at 5:15 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:You really are infested with TDS. I'm disappointed.
So he can kill any opposing Rep/Senator who would vote to impeach or remove him, and he'd be immune for those murders?
The electorate would speak to that as would Congress. Your hypothetical is as dumb as presumption a Dem POTUS could have all GOP voters killed and suffer no consequence from Dem Voters/Congressmen ...
... well, on second thought, maybe in the instance of Dems, it's not so dumb at all.
Posted on 1/6/24 at 5:16 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I don't think that language creates a requirement of impeachment for prosecution.
It's never been tested.
So neither one of us really knows.
Posted on 1/6/24 at 5:21 pm to TrueTiger
quote:
It's never been tested.
Yes. It is now.
quote:
So neither one of us really knows.
Oh I purposefully said "I don't think".
Posted on 1/6/24 at 5:22 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
You really are infested with TDS. I'
This thread is about Biden.
Page 4 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News