Is this within Trump's 'core constitutional powers' or 'official duties?'
from Mediaite:
___Trump urged Attorney General Pam Bondi to bring criminal charges against political enemies like Sen. Adam Schiff (D-CA) and former FBI Director James Comey, saying further delays are only “killing our reputation and credibility.”
In a statement to his Truth Social platform Saturday night, the president turned up the heat on his attorney general to take “action” against Schiff, Comey, and New York Attorney General Letitia James — to name just a few.
Here’s the shocking post in full:
In a follow-up post, Trump reiterated his support for Bondi — and added that Lindsey Halligan, who Trump referenced in his prior post, will be nominated to take over as U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia. Erik Siebert announced plans to resign from that post amid reported pressure from top Trump administration officials to bring a case against James.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-publicly-pressures-pam-bondi-to-charge-his-political-enemies-in-stunning-truth-social-post-we-can-t-delay-any-longer/ar-AA1MYOvO
Supreme Court Justice Roberts argued that “the president is not above the law,” writing that “the president enjoys no immunity for his unofficial acts, and not everything the president does is official.”
However, Roberts added that a president “may not be prosecuted for exercising his core constitutional powers, and he is entitled to at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for his official acts.”
= new reply since forum marked as read
The entire regime is violating the "Take Care" clause every f-ing minute of every day. It is pretty much a given.
But WTF is this?
Did he get confused and post to his Ministry of Truth Social account instead of sending an email?
Everything he does is bizarre, but this seems to fall into a different category. And the follow up makes it worse. It's like he just realized he made a public statement he didn't mean to make and is trying to "fix it." (Not that what he posted makes much sense in the first place.)
IDK. But does this seem stranger than usual to anyone else?
...wild, if true.
In any Democratic majority, this would be yet another basis for impeaching him, but we're in this weird functionally permissive period where the courts and the republican legislature have us suspended on this teeter totter between totalitarianism and democracy on our side by not ruling on major questions.
But to this abomination to democracy, the Roberts Court's maga majority looks to have given him so much of a sense of impunity, without clearly defining what they mean by constitutional duties and official acts which they say gives him immunity.
It's all the more convoluted because the conservative justices, alone, invented the immunity out of their own partisan heads without any regard to anything in the Constitution - against the document, in fact, and made it so vague that even using 'official acts' as PART of evidence of a crime is prohibited by the monarchical maga star chamber's ruling which was delayed until right before we voted, further delaying his trial by some 12 months after he was indicted.
It's no wonder that he's behaving like royalty, dandied-up and gallivanting around in the British king's palaces like an American monarch while his people struggle to afford groceries (a word he just discovered during the election, all by himself).
