|
Quinta Jurecic@qjurecic.bsky.social |
how do you rebut presumption of immunity? nobody knows. but you can't consider the president's motive in rebutting it or the fact that murder is against the law. doesn't matter if president says to his advisors "I would like to kill rival because I hate them." inadmissible
4 replies 11 reposts 75 likes
|
Noel French
@noelfrench.bsky.social
[ View ] |
I think at the end of the day the SCOTUS Six sees itself as the ultimate arbiter of all this and its another power grasp, but they either can't understand or don't care that the circumstances in which that would be necessary are the same circumstances in which they'd be dead or in prison.
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Alexandra Samios
@xanboni.bsky.social
[ View ] |
But aren't the people to whom the order is issued, or who carry it out, obligated not to follow an illegal order, and not immune if /they/ the break the law? It's still illegal, whether or not the President can be prosecuted for it. (h/t @gregsargent.bsky.social )
2 replies 0 reposts 2 likes
|
Roy
@royx.bsky.social
[ View ] |
it does seem like he could confess to it in the state of the union address and it probably wouldn't be admissible either
1 replies 0 reposts 6 likes
|
jhaygood
@jhaygood.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Has anyone figured out what the President COULD be prosecuted for? And I mean that as a serious question.
0 replies 0 reposts 2 likes