world

Trump appeals ruling rejecting immunity claim as window narrows to derail federal election case

64 Comments
By ALANNA DURKIN RICHER and ERIC TUCKER

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2023 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

64 Comments

Comments have been disabled You can no longer respond to this thread.

Former President Donald Trump is appealing a ruling that found he is not immune from criminal prosecution as he runs out of opportunities to delay or even derail an upcoming trial on charges that he plotted to overturn the results of the 2020 election.

Yep, he has no chance of winning this one. If he did win, what is stopping a president from murdering someone and saying that they are immune.

11 ( +13 / -2 )

Clearly a matter for SCOTUS to address.

-14 ( +0 / -14 )

Yep, he has no chance of winning this one. If he did win, what is stopping a president from murdering someone and saying that they are immune.

Oh come on now, would a guy who wants to suspend the constitution and be dictator commit murder? ;)

9 ( +11 / -2 )

Yep, he has no chance of winning this one. If he did win, what is stopping a president from murdering someone and saying that they are immune.

Well Trump did say he could shoot someone on 5th Avenue and most of the electorate of one part of the American duopoly would still be behind him.

Unfortunately American courts are influenced by popular opinion.

10 ( +10 / -0 )

Just continue to fight and never give in to the left and swamp. The more the Dems try as hard as they might to taint this guy his numbers come back making him stronger more popular and turning him in a political martyr.

-20 ( +2 / -22 )

Just continue to fight and never give in to the left and swamp. The more the Dems try as hard as they might to taint this guy his numbers come back making him stronger more popular and turning him in a political martyr.

What a compelling legal defense.

16 ( +18 / -2 )

Steven Cheung said one of Trump's "most sacred obligations and responsibilities as President was to ensure that the election process was conducted in a way that complied with the law, including investigating and challenging election fraud and irregularities."

A president’s duties do not include using the power of the office to subvert the peaceful transfer of power. Trump knew he lost and he knew the claims of a rigged election were bogus.

He’s just a poor loser and a wannabe dictator. He has openly admitted this.

12 ( +15 / -3 )

JJE

Clearly a matter for SCOTUS to address.

SCOTUS won't touch this with a barge pole. I predict they will decline to hear the case.

7 ( +9 / -2 )

What a compelling legal defense.

Better than all the contrive cases and charges they’re trying to hit Trump with.

A president’s duties do not include using the power of the office to subvert the peaceful transfer of power.

But it was ok in 2016 to interfere with the peaceful transfer of power

Trump knew he lost and he knew the claims of a rigged election were bogus. 

That didn’t stop from Abram’s to challenge the results of the election and people were pushing her to NOT accept the results.

He’s just a poor loser

But the left aren’t when they lose? lol

and a wannabe dictator.

He has openly admitted this

If you do what the left always do, take things conservative say out of context and context helps. He’s nowhere remotely close to any dictator we had. But I did like what he said to Hannity, day one, he’ll be a dictator for one day, build the wall and drill, drill, drill. I’m all for that.

-18 ( +1 / -19 )

He’s just a poor loser

But the left aren’t when they lose? lol

and a wannabe dictator.

He has openly admitted this

If you do what the left

I think you have met your quota of mentioning the "left" in an article that makes no mention of the left.

It is a good summation on the Trump legal defense and Trump MAGA 2024.

13 ( +13 / -0 )

Better than all the contrive cases and charges they’re trying to hit Trump with.

Lol no it's not. Cope.

If you do what the left always do, take things conservative say out of context and context helps.

Lol how was Trump saying he wanted to be a dictator taken out of context? I would love it when rightists act like if the language employed by Trump is some great work of art which must be carefully analyzed for context and nuance. It isn't.

15 ( +15 / -0 )

He has no case. None, nada, nil, zip, zilch, zero.

THE central tenant of American Law, indeed the foundation of America is that we do not have Kings and that no one is above the law.

This is a delay tactic and nothing more. I hope the courts expedite the process and show Trump the back of their collective legal hands as they no doubt will certainly do.

14 ( +14 / -0 )

Lol no it's not. Cope. 

I disagree, he is coping and exercising his first amendment.

Lol how was Trump saying he wanted to be a dictator taken out of context?

relax, you didn’t hear what he said, when he was asked about it, he said specifically: “on day one I will be dictator, and I will seal the border and drill, after that, I won’t be a dictator anymore.” again context helps, not to mention he was president already, and he talked a lot of stuff what he wanted to do he couldn’t even get Congress to fund him to build the wall, and now the media thinks he’s going to be dictator and override Congress, how?

-15 ( +0 / -15 )

He has no case. None, nada, nil, zip, zilch, zero. 

Neither do the left.

THE central tenant of American Law, indeed the foundation of America is that we do not have Kings and that no one is above the law. 

Wait, the left all of a sudden NOW care about the law??? That’s some serious 6pm breaking newsflash.

This is a delay tactic and nothing more.

Like Daisy-chaining all of Trump’s trials, and exactly around the time when the primaries start.

I hope the courts expedite the process and show Trump the back of their collective legal hands as they no doubt will certainly do.

And Trump will just sign whatever check they want, but this will help him in the long run with voters.

-13 ( +1 / -14 )

bass4funk

A president’s duties do not include using the power of the office to subvert the peaceful transfer of power.

But it was ok in 2016 to interfere with the peaceful transfer of power

No. Luckily in 2016, there was a peaceful transfer of power.

Trump knew he lost and he knew the claims of a rigged election were bogus. 

That didn’t stop from Abram’s to challenge the results of the election and people were pushing her to NOT accept the results.

Abrams completely accepted the outcome of the election. So not the same at all.

He’s just a poor loser

But the left aren’t when they lose? lol

They don't. And they certainly don't incite an insurrection.

He’s nowhere remotely close to any dictator we had.

Oh, but he is...

11 ( +12 / -1 )

on day one I will be dictator, and I will seal the border and drill, after that, I won’t be a dictator anymore.

1)How can a president be a dictator for a day?

2) What's to stop him from being a dictator for more than a day? Most dictators don't stop at one day.

10 ( +11 / -1 )

bass4funk

Lol how was Trump saying he wanted to be a dictator taken out of context?

relax, you didn’t hear what he said, when he was asked about it, he said specifically: “on day one I will be dictator, and I will seal the border and drill, after that, I won’t be a dictator anymore.” again context helps,

It doesn't really. He was dodging the question, but he did say that he would be a dictator and then some irrelevant stuff.

not to mention he was president already, and he talked a lot of stuff what he wanted to do he couldn’t even get Congress to fund him to build the wall, and now the media thinks he’s going to be dictator and override Congress, how?

You forget that he tried to steal the 2020 election. There was that.

9 ( +10 / -1 )

Neither do the left.

THE central tenant of American Law, indeed the foundation of America is that we do not have Kings and that no one is above the law. 

Wait, the left all of a sudden NOW care about the law??? That’s some serious 6pm breaking newsflash.

Think you have gone over the legal limit of mentions of the "left".

Like Trump, there is nothing new, no fresh ideas, just staccato repetition like some sideshow evangelist.

If you want to MAGA, follow a good Republican like Eisenhower and tax the lazy capital hoarding rich.

https://apnews.com/article/2184e9f18f6f4acca1ed007bdcdca818

12 ( +12 / -0 )

bass4funk

Today 08:09 am JST

"What a compelling legal defense."

Better than all the contrive cases and charges they’re trying to hit Trump with.

Is that so. They should try it in court then. Send it to Trump's legal team, they might want to give you a job.

12 ( +12 / -0 )

He has no case. None, nada, nil, zip, zilch, zero. 

Neither do the left.

The justice department have several cases. They’re even mentioned in the article handily provide above if you need a quick refresher.

9 ( +10 / -1 )

Trump knew he lost and he knew the claims of a rigged election were bogus. 

Not with the information we know now…

Abrams completely accepted the outcome of the election. So not the same at all.

Hardly..

https://news.yahoo.com/stacey-abrams-defends-refusal-concede-165932285.html

He’s just a poor loser

As was Gore and Clinton

But the left aren’t when they lose? lol

They don't. And they certainly don't incite an insurrection. 

Hmmm..

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/31/americans-killed-protests-political-unrest-acled

Oh, but he is..

Sealing the border and drilling.

Context helps.

-14 ( +1 / -15 )

How can a president be a dictator for a day?

Of course, a dictator for a day being bought by anyone is ignorance being yanked by Trump.

It's ridiculous for anyone to believe Trump is constitutionally loyal to the United States, believes in democracy, and isn't into dictatorship for himself is completely brainwashed and incapable of critical thought and reason.

Any argument that goes from what Trump is saying to false equivalence and red herring arguments by spewing things like the left does his or that or Biden this or that cannot truly have any credible words, it's just silly and those Trump supporters need to wake up, and realize what is written about his penchant for dictatorial and one man power should be acknowledged.

A ten year old with reason could understand this better than Trump followers.

12 ( +12 / -0 )

Is that so. They should try it in court then. Send it to Trump's legal team, they might want to give you a job

If you study US law you might be able to get a job working for the state. Lol

-12 ( +1 / -13 )

Lol how was Trump saying he wanted to be a dictator taken out of context?

By you not listening to what he said when he was pressed on the question. So you can either hear what the man stated when asked that very question or you can take the liberal position and come up with your personal conclusions and beliefs.

It doesn't really. He was dodging the question,

He answered it and stated what he would do.

but he did say that he would be a dictator and then some irrelevant stuff.

So he’s going to override congress?? How? Wait, he’ll get the military to shoot all the Congress members?

You forget that he tried to steal the 2020 election.

Here we go…

-11 ( +1 / -12 )

bass4funk

Abrams completely accepted the outcome of the election. So not the same at all.

Hardly..

https://news.yahoo.com/stacey-abrams-defends-refusal-concede-165932285.html

Quotes from Abrams: “I have never denied that I lost. I don’t live in the governor’s mansion; I would have noticed.” “The first thing I said was that I acknowledged the outcome — that the new governor was Brian Kemp. I was not the governor, but I did say the system was broken.”

He’s just a poor loser

As was Gore and Clinton

Gore and Clinton were both gracious losers.

They don't. And they certainly don't incite an insurrection. 

Hmmm..

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/31/americans-killed-protests-political-unrest-acled

That article is irrelevant. It has nothing about inciting an insurrection.

Oh, but he is..

Sealing the border and drilling.

Context helps.

I wasn't referring to what Trump said, I was referring to the fact that Trump tried to steal the 2020 election after he lost.

10 ( +10 / -0 )

400 time he plead the 5th amendment just in one case and the Judge will net him off ??? If I was a bookie I would not be offering any odds on the game.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

You know, Dems like Mattis, Kelly, Pence, Meadows, Powell, Ellis, Cheseboro, Barr, Bolton, et al...all former Trump handpicks. Makes you wonder why Trump prefers Dems and Leftists in his administration.

Pretty much, establishment all the way, funny how no one would ever elect any of these people to work at a 7-11

You do know what happens to martyrs, right?

They become even more powerful symbolically and spiritually.

-12 ( +0 / -12 )

The seems to be considerable opposition on this thread to SCOTUS addressing this very important and unresolved issue.

Can't understand why. Makes one wonder.

-9 ( +0 / -9 )

Quotes from Abrams: "We don't know what really happened because of the miasma of voter suppression," she said. "There's something about uncertainty that's worse than knowing you just suck. Knowing that you did this thing wrong ... there's clarity there, and absence clarity, your mind starts to whirl, and it doesn't stop."

"Words matter ... For me, concession, there’s a legal and moral nature to conceding," Abrams said later. "It means you accept that something is right, that it is just, that it is proper. What happened was not just. And it's not about whether I get to be inaugurated as governor."

He’s just a poor loser

So was she.

Gore and Clinton were both gracious losers.

Hmmm

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/hillary-clinton-wont-accept-yet-another-election-outcome

They don't. And they certainly don't incite an insurrection. 

Hmmm..

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/31/americans-killed-protests-political-unrest-acled

That article is irrelevant. It has nothing about inciting an insurrection.

So it’s irrelevant when it comes to the left and violent protests, video doesn’t lie, regardless if the left think that if they say it enough they can force feed the facts down your throat.

I wasn't referring to what Trump said, I was referring to the fact that Trump tried to steal the 2020 election after he lost.

If you think so, many of us now with what we know think differently.

-10 ( +0 / -10 )

Well thanks for admitting Trump prefers Leftists.

I never said, nor implied that.

How do you get "elected" to work at a 7-11?

None of these people couldn’t even get a job there whether by hiring or electing them..

By dying for their cause

That is one way, figuratively speaking

-10 ( +0 / -10 )

JJE

The seems to be considerable opposition on this thread to SCOTUS addressing this very important and unresolved issue.

I have no opposition to SCOTUS considering this and if they did, they would strike it down. The president isn't a king. But I doubt they would consider it; it would be a waste of time.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

bass4funk

I wasn't referring to what Trump said, I was referring to the fact that Trump tried to steal the 2020 election after he lost.

If you think so, many of us now with what we know think differently.

The good news is that it will be decided in court.

And the evidence is pretty overwhelming. And that's just what we know. Wait until Mark Meadows is testifying against him...

5 ( +5 / -0 )

The president isn't a king; agreed. He is however the president, and Obama and no one before him went to jail or were even indicted - all 44 of them.

It's no big secret there is a 6-3 slant in that court (including three appointed by the King himself).

Be honest and admit it: you don't want it to go to the Supreme Court because of the current composition of the justices sitting on it.

Can you?

-10 ( +0 / -10 )

Delay, delay, delay (never win). Trump Legal Tactics 101.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

I wasn't referring to what Trump

I was

The good news is that it will be decided in court.

The better news is this continues to help Trump.

And the evidence is pretty overwhelming. And that's just what we know. Wait until Mark Meadows is testifying against him...

Good. Won’t help Biden

-7 ( +1 / -8 )

JJE

The president isn't a king; agreed. He is however the president, and Obama and no one before him went to jail or were even indicted - all 44 of them.

Well, that's because they didn't commit crimes. If you commit crimes, that's when you get indicted.

It's no big secret there is a 6-3 slant in that court (including three appointed by the King himself).

It's also no secret that while they rule with their religious convictions (6 Catholics - Row vs Wade), they also tend to rule toward democracy in other rulings (like the voting rights act).

Be honest and admit it: you don't want it to go to the Supreme Court because of the current composition of the justices sitting on it.

Can you?

Nope, because even though the SCOTUS is slanted, it's pretty obvious that they wouldn't uphold this.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Trump thinks laws don't apply to him. The courts need to be clear and show they absolutely do apply. Lock him up.

8 ( +9 / -1 )

bass4funk

The good news is that it will be decided in court.

The better news is this continues to help Trump.

Maybe for his popularity, but not for staying out of jail.

And the evidence is pretty overwhelming. And that's just what we know. Wait until Mark Meadows is testifying against him...

Good. Won’t help Biden

Biden doesn't need any help. If the economy stays as it is now, he'll win next year,

5 ( +6 / -1 )

Gore and Clinton were both gracious losers.

Hillary Clinton Maintains 2016 Election ‘Was Not On the Level’: ‘We Still Don’t Know What Really Happened’

https://news.yahoo.com/hillary-clinton-maintains-2016-election-160716779.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

zibala

Gore and Clinton were both gracious losers.

Hillary Clinton Maintains 2016 Election ‘Was Not On the Level’: ‘We Still Don’t Know What Really Happened’

https://news.yahoo.com/hillary-clinton-maintains-2016-election-160716779.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall

And yet she conceded to Trump the morning after the results were in. Still waiting for Trump to concede the 2020 election...

6 ( +8 / -2 )

And yet she conceded to Trump the morning after the results were in. Still waiting for Trump to concede the 2020 election...

That's a different issue.

Back to the claim she was a gracious loser.

If she conceded to Trump the morning after the results were in, but even 4 years after that she was claiming Putin helped rig the election against her---that is nowhere near the definition of a "gracious loser".

-11 ( +0 / -11 )

bass4funk

Today 08:51 am JST

If you study US law you might be able to get a job working for the state. Lol

Come on, you said your argument is better than what the prosecutors have got. Why does the defence not try it in court if it's so brilliant?

8 ( +9 / -1 )

Come on, you said your argument is better than what the prosecutors have got.

Most people think so, not just me.

Why does the defence not try it in court if it's so brilliant?

Unlike like Trump-hating liberals, I won't guess and I am not being paid, nor am I on the team to guess as to why that is, but at $500 an hour, I am sure they do have a plan and reason. Let's just wait and see.

-9 ( +1 / -10 )

The good news is that it will be decided in court.

The better news is this continues to help Trump.

Maybe for his popularity, but not for staying out of jail.

He won't go to jail, even Holder said that, the chances of that happening is 1%

And the evidence is pretty overwhelming. And that's just what we know. Wait until Mark Meadows is testifying against him...

Biden doesn't need any help.

According to the polls, he is beyond help. Doesn't look good.

If the economy stays as it is now, he'll win next year,

That would be saying Hillary will be the next nominee. Honestly, I pray that he runs on the economy, really. Huh, wonder why the WH doesn't use Bidenomics anymore....

https://www.heritage.org/markets-and-finance/commentary/failure-bidenomics-rankling-americans

-11 ( +1 / -12 )

zibala

And yet she conceded to Trump the morning after the results were in. Still waiting for Trump to concede the 2020 election...

That's a different issue.

No, it isn’t.

Back to the claim she was a gracious loser.

She was. She conceded the morning after.

In comparison, Trump even left the White House before Joe moved in. Talk about a whiny little sore loser.

7 ( +8 / -1 )

One wonders just how stupid one has to be to believe all of Trump’s easily and thoroughly debunked lies and whataboutisms?

Well, we can see right here in the JT comments thread.

11 ( +11 / -0 )

By you not listening to what he said when he was pressed on the question. So you can either hear what the man stated when asked that very question or you can take the liberal position and come up with your personal conclusions and beliefs.

lol I heard what he stated. He stated he wanted to be a dictator. And his little followers are even saying they want him to be a dictator now.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

Most people think so, not just me.

Did you ask all of them? Back to the usual I see, smh.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

Well, we can see right here in the JT comments thread.

I think him climbing in the polls is rightly getting the left extremely edgy. I get it.

lol I heard what he stated.

I doubt it.

He stated he wanted to be a dictator.

See, you didn’t listen. lol.

And his little followers are even saying they want him to be a dictator now.

Well, like he said on Hannity, seal the border and drill, I’m down with that dictatorship any day of the week.

-12 ( +0 / -12 )

That's a different issue.

No, it isn’t.

Yes it is, and if you believe conceding one day and then whining for the next 8 years is being a gracious loser then, well, you understand at least why the American public did not want Hillary anyway.

Back to the claim she was a gracious loser.

She was. She conceded the morning after.

Nope.

So, she lied the day after with her false concession speech. And then let the American public see the real Hillary with her whining for the next 8 years:

Hillary Clinton is sticking with her conviction that the 2016 presidential election was not conducted legitimately, saying the details surrounding her loss are still unclear.

“There was a widespread understanding that this election [in 2016] was not on the level,”

“We still don’t know what really happened.”

“But you don’t win by 3 million votes and have all this other shenanigans and stuff going on and not come away with an idea like, ‘Whoa, something’s not right here.’ *

“I really did feel sometimes like the tree falling in the forest.

I believed he was a puppet of Putin.

I believed that there was relevant, important information in his tax returns. I believed he did not have the temperament to be president, he was unfit—not a partisan comment, but an assessment of him,” the former secretary of state said.*
-11 ( +0 / -11 )

See, you didn’t listen. lol.

Are you telling me now that isn't what he said? Of course that:s what he said, and the fact he "only" wants to be dictator for a day, or "drill" doesn't take away from the fact he wants to be a dictator.

Well, like he said on Hannity, seal the border and drill, I’m down with that dictatorship any day of the week.

And there we have it yet again: They want a dictatorship.

Hey Bass: What happens when that dictator does something you don't like?

7 ( +7 / -0 )

Any news is goods news, the more negative and controversial the better.

This is what he thrives on. I can feel his polls going up again.

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

Hey Bass: What happens when that dictator does something you don't like?

Easy. It was actually deep state Rino swamp undercover marxists.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

Are you telling me now that isn't what he said?

Did you watch the Hannity interview when he was asked that direct question? Yes or No?

*Of course that:s what he said, and the fact he "only" wants to be dictator for a day, or "drill" doesn't take away from the fact he wants to be a dictator.*

“dictator for a day”

So what’s your worry? .

And there we have it yet again: They want a dictatorship.

Sealing the border to stop illegals from coming and making us energy independent is bad now? Why?

Hey Bass: What happens when that dictator does something you don't like?

Like this current President, a lot I don’t like and nothing I can do except wait until election and vote him out of office.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

Easy. It was actually deep state Rino swamp undercover marxists.

I wouldn’t doubt that hypothesis for a moment.

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

So what’s your worry? .

Again:

1)How does one become dictator for a day?

2)What's to stop Trump at being a dictator for "only" a day? I don't believe he wants to be dictator for a day. He, and his supporters, want him to be dictator for life.

Sealing the border to stop illegals from coming and making us energy independent is bad now? Why?

I didn't say that. I said you wanting a dictatorship is bad .

Like this current President, a lot I don’t like and nothing I can do except wait until election and vote him out of office.

This current president isn't a dictator. Has never said he wants to be a dictator and you can vote him out. That won't be the case with dictator trump once he does away with the constitution and installs himself as a dictator. So again, what are you going to do when the dictator does something you don't like?

4 ( +4 / -0 )

1)How does one become dictator for a day? 

he was already president, and he made a lot of threats back then, and nothing happened, he couldn’t get a lot of things passed because of Congress, relax

2)What's to stop Trump at being a dictator for "only" a day?

Who’s going to go along with that the military the Pentagon, how would they go about doing that suspend habeas corpus? How would they get past the Senate?

I don't believe he wants to be dictator for a day. He, and his supporters, want him to be dictator for life. 

OK, so how would that happen? The left talk about it, but no one‘s giving detail as to how Trump would be able to accomplish that.

I didn't say that. I said you wanting a dictatorship is bad.

It is? How so?

This current president isn't a dictator.

Ok, you may think that, I disagree

Has never said he wants to be a dictator and you can vote him out.

The same Trump, so you don’t need to worry, although I do have to say the Democrats are trying their hardest to make sure that he’s not the nominee.

That won't be the case with dictator trump once he does away with the constitution and installs himself as a dictator. So again, what are you going to do when the dictator does something you don't like?

ROFL!

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

Easy. It was actually deep state Rino swamp undercover marxists.

I wouldn’t doubt that hypothesis for a moment.

We know. That’s why you are the ideal 45 supporter, flock to fleece.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Thanks to the citizen who vote in 2001, in my Country that we stay a Democratic Monarchy instead of a becoming Republic. With the Trump era and how manic the USA system is, has put dead next years referendum for decades on becoming a Republic. Great work Trump and a big thanks.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

he was already president, and he made a lot of threats back then, and nothing happened, he couldn’t get a lot of things passed because of Congress, relax

Yes, he made a lot stupid, indefensible threats, but he never claimed he wanted to be dictator then. Now he has. And frankly, that's about the best way for him to stay out of jail.

Who’s going to go along with that the military the Pentagon, how would they go about doing that suspend habeas corpus? How would they get past the Senate?

The same people that are onboard with making him dictator for a day. Again, you've yet to explain how that's constitutional.

It is? How so?

Really? You don't understand how dictatorships are bad?

The same Trump, so you don’t need to worry, although I do have to say the Democrats are trying their hardest to make sure that he’s not the nominee

Uh no, not if he suspends the constitution like he's said he wants to do.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Well, we can see right here in the JT comments thread.

I think him climbing in the polls is rightly getting the left extremely edgy. I get it.

Morons loving a moron. What are the odds?

Fortunately, his appeal is limited to his cult rubes.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

Yes, he made a lot stupid, indefensible threats, but he never claimed he wanted to be dictator then.

Yes, he did and people were calling him a dictator, then, but it didn’t work and nothing happened.

Now he has. And frankly, that's about the best way for him to stay out of jail. 

OK, so you’re saying, Congress can’t stop the president, that’s what you’re saying, you’re actually saying the military is going to back him 100% and locking down the nation, with all due respect…

The same people that are onboard with making him dictator for a day. Again, you've yet to explain how that's constitutional. 

Because it never happened, and it never will happen, I think you need to take a moment, the left is really getting to you. Lol

Really? You don't understand how dictatorships are bad? 

The only thing I care about is, how would he execute that, this is really funny, but seriously, how would he execute that? Please give concise details

Uh no, not if he suspends the constitution like he's said he wants to do.

And Congress is going to let him do that? You really think that both the Democrats and Republicans will allow him to do that.

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

Fortunately, his appeal is limited to his cult rubes.

no, according to the polls, that’s why everyone’s freaking out, fortunately

-10 ( +0 / -10 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites