Godlike Productions - Reply to Thread

Users Online Now: 1,021 (Who's On?)	Visitors Today: 103,364
Pageviews Today: 207,480	Threads Today: 72	Posts Today: 1,485
03:38 AM

Back to Forum

Back to Thread

REPLY TO THREAD

Subject Jury of your peers: Do members of Congress & President have immunity?

User Name

Captcha

Font color: Font:

In accordance with industry accepted best practices we ask that users limit their copy / paste of copyrighted material to the relevant portions of the article you wish to discuss and no more than 50% of the source material, provide a link back to the original article and provide your original comments / criticism in your post with the article.

[quote:Evolution16:MV80MDA1MjM0XzlGRjdCN0Q3]
Can anyone think of a president or member of the house or senate that has faced an actual trial in front of a jury of peers for a crime committed related to their job? Not DUI, Not drugs, a crime in the context of their job as a servant of the people of the US.

If the answer is no, which the fact that i can't find an example doesn't mean there isn't one, then what is more likely?:

A) They have never committed a crime against the American people so no trial by jury has ever been necessary

B) There is some technicality in jurisdiction that arose from the 1871 gov reorg and the fact that DC has its own laws etc. that protects from this ever happening - like immunity by a technicality which is not supposed to be known by the public

IF the answer is (B) it would certainly explain so many things, and also how the court of public opinion is the only court that they are not immune to in doing their jobs.

So if this is potentially the case, how brilliant would it be to get the democrats to effectively beg for, not knowing what's in the Mueller report, their own trial by public opinion? That would be insanely brilliant I must say.
[/quote]

Original Message Can anyone think of a president or member of the house or senate that has faced an actual trial in front of a jury of peers for a crime committed related to their job? Not DUI, Not drugs, a crime in the context of their job as a servant of the people of the US.

If the answer is no, which the fact that i can't find an example doesn't mean there isn't one, then what is more likely?:

A) They have never committed a crime against the American people so no trial by jury has ever been necessary

OR

B) There is some technicality in jurisdiction that arose from the 1871 gov reorg and the fact that DC has its own laws etc. that protects from this ever happening - like immunity by a technicality which is not supposed to be known by the public

IF the answer is (B) it would certainly explain so many things, and also how the court of public opinion is the only court that they are not immune to in doing their jobs.

So if this is potentially the case, how brilliant would it be to get the democrats to effectively beg for, not knowing what's in the Mueller report, their own trial by public opinion? That would be insanely brilliant I must say.

Pictures (click to insert)





\| Next Page >>