Liar Liar Pants On Fire

No, I am not. Old phrase,"What's good for the goose is good for the gander." I ask a very simple question that you can't seem to answer. Think of it as a "Horns of a dilemma" kind of question. If you say Yes, then Biden is immune as well, if you say no then you are saying Trump is above the law. Very simple. So which is it?
 
#jpl458: You are attempting to incorrectly force logic towards an asymmetrical situation that is illogical. In your world Trump is guilty by definition while Biden is innocent by definition. Consequently, your supposed "question" can't be answered to your satisfaction.
 
The left has turned Trump into a cult classic by accident. :LOL:
 
Take Trump and Biden out of the equation. If any President is deemed to be immune, wouldn't that immunity apply to all Presidents? It's like saying the speed limit on this road is 40 MPH. Would that not apply to all citizens, or not? I am not talking about guilt or innocence with regard to Trump. He is innocent until proven guilty. Does the law apply to everyone or not? Steve R, There is nothing asymmetrical about the question.
 
Breaking news: New York State declares Trump sneakers only worth $18. Will seek 1 billion dollar fine to help the victims who bought $400 sneakers, now worth thousands.

View attachment 112640
GHCDPc9WEAAqQZP.jpg
 
Because there is NO absolute yes or no answer to the question. For there to be a Yes/No option it needs to 100% one or the other and the answer is "it depends". But, there is no ambiguity in the answers. If Trump is immune, then Biden is immune for the SAME OFFENSE. You keep wanting to make the offenses different and so no one is going to say that Biden is immune in situation a but Trump is not because that isn't how it should work. It is how the Dems want it to work however.
"If Trump is immune, then Biden is immune for the SAME OFFENSE."
I agree with that.

But Trump claims that Presidential immunity is absloute.
 
Who did Obama murder, or caim he could murder? BTW, here is part of the ruling of 3 judge panel of the circuit court. Implicite, is a ruling on absolute immunity. In the last line.

“At bottom, former President Trump’s stance would collapse our system of separated powers by placing the president beyond the reach of all three branches,” they wrote. “Presidential immunity against federal indictment would mean that, as to the president, the Congress could not legislate, the executive could not prosecute and the judiciary could not review. We cannot accept that the office of the presidency places its former occupants above the law for all time."
 
"If Trump is immune, then Biden is immune for the SAME OFFENSE."
I agree with that.

But Trump claims that Presidential immunity is absloute.
As I was alluding to, your question was dishonest trap meant to twist logic for the purpose of finding Trump somehow guilty of something.

You neglect that Biden is abusing the legal system by depriving Trump's right to immunity to make Trump a criminal. Recall that Biden, besides the question of immunity, has already refused to honor long standing principles of Exutive Privilege and Client Attorney Privilege. Very dishonest of Biden.

If you want an honest response to your question; you should be writing it within the context that Biden has weaponized the legal which invalidates the neutral application of the law. This places Biden above the law, as judge, jury, and executionor all rolled into one.
 
Last edited:
As I was alluding to, your question was dishonest trap meant to twist logic for the purpose of finding Trump somehow guilty of something.

You neglect that Biden is abusing the legal system to make Trump a criminal. If you want an honest response to your question; you should be writing it within the context that Biden has weaponized the legal which invalidates the neutral application of the law. This places Biden above the law, as judge, jury, and executionor all rolled into one.
I don't agree. Biden didn't order jusrice to go after Trump. The House Select Commitee sent it's findings to Juistice, then a special couincil was appointed. That is the way it works. Biden did not subvert the separation of powers. By the same token, if the claims that Biden and Hunter had recieved bribes I would be on them as well. But the house commitee seems to be fresh out of evidence on that subject. In my original post on the subject is was just asking about immunity. I wasn't trying to prove Trump guilty of anything. I just found the idea of Presidential immunity for any and all crimes committed in office to be absurd.
 
Last edited:
I don't agree. Biden didn't order jusrice to go after Trump.
Based on all the spurious unjustified lawsuits/criminal indictments filed, it is obvious that the Biden administration has colluded, in an illegal manner, to get Trump. In fact, Democrats are once again trying to resurrect the discredited Russa hoax. An example of "show me the man, I will find the crime". Biden is practicing Soviet style democracy to cripple political opposition. Biden is a disciple of Putin.
 
Last edited:
Based on all the spurious unjustified lawsuits/criminal indictments filed, it is obvious that the Biden administration has colluded, in an illegal manner, to get Trump. In fact, Democrats are once again trying to resurrect the discredited Russa hoax. An example of "show me the man, I will find the crime". Biden is practicing Soviet style democracy to cripple political opposition. Biden is a disciple of Putin.
And you have imperical evidence that the crimenal indictments were bogus? Obvious is not enough, since it's in the eye of the beholder.How did Biden cause this to happen? Who did he order to do what?
 
What tapes. Hope you are not refering to tapes of Smirnov. Seems he wansn't telling the truth.
 
And you have imperical evidence that the crimenal indictments were bogus? Obvious is not enough, since it's in the eye of the beholder.How did Biden cause this to happen? Who did he order to do what?
Do you have any evidence of proof that the your claims that the bogus indictments were not the result of collusion?
Simply posting opinion proves nothing.
 
What tapes. Hope you are not refering to tapes of Smirnov. Seems he wansn't telling the truth.
He was credible for nine of the ten years he was employed by the FBI, I wonder what's changed?:unsure:
 
Hope you are not refering to tapes of Smirnov. Seems he wansn't telling the truth.
Amusing that you would post that, as that was an example of the Democrats using a liar (Steele) to persecute Trump for four years. Steele does not get arrested, yet when Smirnov allegedly lies against Biden, he gets arrested. That is proof of Democrats abusing the law for their benefit.

I previously wrote:
Once again, you make a sensational anti-Trump post, that upon inspection turns out to be a case of selective prosecution that ignores the greater legal corruption by the Democrats. So a CHS that accuses H. Biden gets indicted, but CHSs, such as Steele and Halper, who provided misinformation (lies) concerning Trump don't get indicted. Sounds like an inconsistent application of the law for the purpose of protecting the Biden administration and crippling Trump's efforts to clear his name.
 
I once aspired to immigrate to the USA....

I'm glad I didn't!
 
I once aspired to immigrate to the USA....

I'm glad I didn't!
Try now. I understand that you get a welcome package and free transportation to the resort of your desire, all courtesy of the US government.
 
Try now. I understand that you get a welcome package and free transportation to the resort of your desire, all courtesy of the US government.

No, you couldn't pay me to immigrate to the USA now.

Are Americans leaving the USA?

I saw a clip where Sylvester Stallone said he was going to move from California to Florida, makes me think some might leave the USA all together!
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom