The immunity is limited to official acts, but the problem, is you could argue almost anything a president does is an official act. Plus, as you said, they fined Obama's campaign, so he wasn't immune or he wouldnt have been fined. Nixon was pardoned, which was not a good decision, and Clinton was impeached. I don't think anyone is asking for presidents to be charged over every little thing, but this decision is going to give presidents much more leeway to do things without worrying about the legalities of what they are doing.
Do you believe, I mean truly believe in our Constitution and Bill of Rights? Do you believe in the 6th Amendment where you as a citizen have a right to trial by your peers? Where you have a right to a defense and face your accusers ? Where you are presumed innocent before a court of law where the prosecutor has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you are guilty? Do you believe in this? I hope you do. I do.
None of this negates the idea that we should at least have the ability to prosecute former presidents if need be. I agree, we shouldn't prosecute everything (an American citizen was also killed during Trumps term btw, and people werent calling to prosecute Trump for it either), but we can't predict the future. What if we do end up with a Hitler or Mussolini type figure down the road? What if a president leaving office sells national security information to a foreign power? This decision would severely limits our ability to prosecute them.
Perhaps. I tend to think if we give our leaders legal immunity we cut down on the political process where tyrants can form and go after their rivals with impunity through criminal prosecutions. If you allow this behavior you create a climate where you breed tyrants and thugs , a Stalin or Hitler or Mau. You create a single party state and then the Republic is lost. That's the end game here if you don't give some broad immunity.
The enabling act of 1933 is what allowed Hitler to become a dictator, and it more or less gave him immunity, because it gave him full control of the government with no checks and balances. So no, I don't think immunity disuades dictators, I think it makes them easier to come about.
The point is it has always been considered the law of the land, they simply said the long term status quo still stands. There is no new law in this ruling just simply confirmed what was already in place. It helps Trump with a couple of cases and has little to no effect on others. The Smith case should be thrown out as he isn't legally a special prosecutor.
Good point. I should probably start listening to podcasters who barely graduated high school or something. Thanks for your insight thall, it's always much appreciated.
let's get you off the internet and reading books instead
True. What books do you read that make you so smart? You are Obviously a great thinker. I like the way you call people retards over and over. Be a friend and help me out with some suggestions so I can be on your level.
absolutely, thrilled you asked!
