President trump

WaspAir

Supreme Allied Gyro CFI
Joined
Oct 21, 2006
Messages
4,979
Location
Colorado front range
Aircraft
Bell 47G-3B-1 / A&S 18A / Phoebus C, etc.
Total Flight Time
stopped caring at 1000
Geez, every time I check back there's ten more pages of the same stuff.
This time, I can't let this go uncorrected.
If the press can prove it, why couldn't the IRS, US Attorneys office, Secret Service,.US Marshals, or the FBI find any of this stuff during the vetting process for his run for office? You do know the get vetted by all law enforcement before they get on the ballot, right?
None of those federal agencies does any vetting for U.S. Presidential candidates as a filter to get on the ballot. They don't even have constitutional authority to do it (at least that's the official claim of the Trump administration, supported by at least one federal court). China and Russia have managed to keep people they don't like off the ballots for office, but it is unconstitutional to restrict access here.

Presidential candidates must separately qualify for the ballot in each state and territory, complying with each jurisdiction's filing deadlines, but the states are not empowered to set qualifications beyond the minimal ones set in the federal Constitution for citizenship (natural born U.S. citizen), residency (fourteen years in U.S.) and age (35+), per Article II Section 1 Clause 5. (There are a couple of disqualifying conditions elsewhere in the Constitution that don't usually apply, such as already having served two terms -- 22nd Amendment, or having fought for the Confederates in the Civil War - - 14th Amendment section 3.)

Recently, California attempted to add disclosure of tax returns as a prerequisite to appearing on the primary ballot, and they were immediately sued by the Trump campaign and the Republican party, who argued that nothing beyond citizenship, residency, and age could be required for appearing on the ballot (and that means no vetting by law enforcement). They successfully blocked implementation of the new law. https://abcnews.go.com/US/judge-blocks-california-law-aimed-president-trumps-tax/story?id=66002183 About two dozen states tried to enact legislation to require particular forms of proof of citizenship in the wake of Trump's birther claims about Obama, but it seems those efforts died somewhere in committee or elsewhere along the way.

The only vetting that is done is by the political parties (the nominating party to avoid scandals and the opposing parties to look for dirt).

Exactly, the DEMS play on the fact you are stupid and don't know that the government law enforcement agencies look for anything you've done before you run for president to make sure you don't get arrested while in office.
Be careful who you go about calling stupid.
Generally, you can't arrested while you're in office, which is an important point made clear at the time of the infamous Mueller report (an Office of Legal Counsel memo prohibits the U.S. Justice Department from indicting a sitting president). Any criminal legal action has to wait until after the president leaves office, to avoid disruption to the government.

Appearing on the ballot doesn't mean that you have been vetted by federal law enforcement agencies; they're simply not in that business.
 

All_In

Gold Supporter
Joined
Apr 21, 2008
Messages
15,535
Location
San Diego, CA. USA
Aircraft
Piper Archer, Aviomania G1sb
Total Flight Time
Not sure over 10,000+ logged FW, 260+ ultralights, sailplane, hang-gliders
Geez, every time I check back there's ten more pages of the same stuff.
This time, I can't let this go uncorrected.

None of those federal agencies does any vetting for U.S. Presidential candidates as a filter to get on the ballot. They don't even have constitutional authority to do it (at least that's the official claim of the Trump administration, supported by at least one federal court). China and Russia have managed to keep people they don't like off the ballots for office, but it is unconstitutional to restrict access here.

Presidential candidates must separately qualify for the ballot in each state and territory, complying with each jurisdiction's filing deadlines, but the states are not empowered to set qualifications beyond the minimal ones set in the federal Constitution for citizenship (natural born U.S. citizen), residency (fourteen years in U.S.) and age (35+), per Article II Section 1 Clause 5. (There are a couple of disqualifying conditions elsewhere in the Constitution that don't usually apply, such as already having served two terms -- 22nd Amendment, or having fought for the Confederates in the Civil War - - 14th Amendment section 3.)

Recently, California attempted to add disclosure of tax returns as a prerequisite to appearing on the primary ballot, and they were immediately sued by the Trump campaign and the Republican party, who argued that nothing beyond citizenship, residency, and age could be required for appearing on the ballot (and that means no vetting by law enforcement). They successfully blocked implementation of the new law. https://abcnews.go.com/US/judge-blocks-california-law-aimed-president-trumps-tax/story?id=66002183 About two dozen states tried to enact legislation to require particular forms of proof of citizenship in the wake of Trump's birther claims about Obama, but it seems those efforts died somewhere in committee or elsewhere along the way.

The only vetting that is done is by the political parties (the nominating party to avoid scandals and the opposing parties to look for dirt).


Be careful who you go about calling stupid.
Generally, you can't arrested while you're in office, which is an important point made clear at the time of the infamous Mueller report (an Office of Legal Counsel memo prohibits the U.S. Justice Department from indicting a sitting president). Any criminal legal action has to wait until after the president leaves office, to avoid disruption to the government.

Appearing on the ballot doesn't mean that you have been vetted by federal law enforcement agencies; they're simply not in that business.
That is GENERALLY correct! Rember history, Bill Clinton has not tried, convicted, and then disbarred for lying under oath until after he was out of office. And the Dem's still love him.
I don't care what you do to him after he's out of office.
If anyone cares that the middle-class is not being left behind they will vote for Trump and it is the only person including the Bush's that has manufactures and our jobs coming back with national economic records to prove it true. He's the only person with a job creation program since Bill Clinton's tax cuts created the same prosperity and a surplus, not a debt, on paper. Same with JFK's and Regan tax cuts job creation and prosperity.
Those who do not remember history will be doomed to repeat it unless you have a REAL understanding of supply and demand for jobs in an all capitalistic world where the only things countries now have to compete with are tax rates.
 

hillberg

Super Member
Joined
May 24, 2010
Messages
4,308
Location
Low Earth Orbit
Geez, every time I check back there's ten more pages of the same stuff.
This time, I can't let this go uncorrected.

None of those federal agencies does any vetting for U.S. Presidential candidates as a filter to get on the ballot. They don't even have constitutional authority to do it (at least that's the official claim of the Trump administration, supported by at least one federal court). China and Russia have managed to keep people they don't like off the ballots for office, but it is unconstitutional to restrict access here.

Presidential candidates must separately qualify for the ballot in each state and territory, complying with each jurisdiction's filing deadlines, but the states are not empowered to set qualifications beyond the minimal ones set in the federal Constitution for citizenship (natural born U.S. citizen), residency (fourteen years in U.S.) and age (35+), per Article II Section 1 Clause 5. (There are a couple of disqualifying conditions elsewhere in the Constitution that don't usually apply, such as already having served two terms -- 22nd Amendment, or having fought for the Confederates in the Civil War - - 14th Amendment section 3.)

Recently, California attempted to add disclosure of tax returns as a prerequisite to appearing on the primary ballot, and they were immediately sued by the Trump campaign and the Republican party, who argued that nothing beyond citizenship, residency, and age could be required for appearing on the ballot (and that means no vetting by law enforcement). They successfully blocked implementation of the new law. https://abcnews.go.com/US/judge-blocks-california-law-aimed-president-trumps-tax/story?id=66002183 About two dozen states tried to enact legislation to require particular forms of proof of citizenship in the wake of Trump's birther claims about Obama, but it seems those efforts died somewhere in committee or elsewhere along the way.

The only vetting that is done is by the political parties (the nominating party to avoid scandals and the opposing parties to look for dirt).


Be careful who you go about calling stupid.
Generally, you can't arrested while you're in office, which is an important point made clear at the time of the infamous Mueller report (an Office of Legal Counsel memo prohibits the U.S. Justice Department from indicting a sitting president). Any criminal legal action has to wait until after the president leaves office, to avoid disruption to the government.

Appearing on the ballot doesn't mean that you have been vetted by federal law enforcement agencies; they're simply not in that business.
And that's how Obama the 1st Kenyan got into the white house. And Congress does the vetting of POTUS but we all know how they "work"
 

skyguynca

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2004
Messages
1,944
Location
Acampo, CA
Aircraft
depends on what I have sold recently
Total Flight Time
5000+
Geez, every time I check back there's ten more pages of the same stuff.
This time, I can't let this go uncorrected.

None of those federal agencies does any vetting for U.S. Presidential candidates as a filter to get on the ballot. They don't even have constitutional authority to do it (at least that's the official claim of the Trump administration, supported by at least one federal court). China and Russia have managed to keep people they don't like off the ballots for office, but it is unconstitutional to restrict access here.

Presidential candidates must separately qualify for the ballot in each state and territory, complying with each jurisdiction's filing deadlines, but the states are not empowered to set qualifications beyond the minimal ones set in the federal Constitution for citizenship (natural born U.S. citizen), residency (fourteen years in U.S.) and age (35+), per Article II Section 1 Clause 5. (There are a couple of disqualifying conditions elsewhere in the Constitution that don't usually apply, such as already having served two terms -- 22nd Amendment, or having fought for the Confederates in the Civil War - - 14th Amendment section 3.)

Recently, California attempted to add disclosure of tax returns as a prerequisite to appearing on the primary ballot, and they were immediately sued by the Trump campaign and the Republican party, who argued that nothing beyond citizenship, residency, and age could be required for appearing on the ballot (and that means no vetting by law enforcement). They successfully blocked implementation of the new law. https://abcnews.go.com/US/judge-blocks-california-law-aimed-president-trumps-tax/story?id=66002183 About two dozen states tried to enact legislation to require particular forms of proof of citizenship in the wake of Trump's birther claims about Obama, but it seems those efforts died somewhere in committee or elsewhere along the way.

The only vetting that is done is by the political parties (the nominating party to avoid scandals and the opposing parties to look for dirt).


Be careful who you go about calling stupid.
Generally, you can't arrested while you're in office, which is an important point made clear at the time of the infamous Mueller report (an Office of Legal Counsel memo prohibits the U.S. Justice Department from indicting a sitting president). Any criminal legal action has to wait until after the president leaves office, to avoid disruption to the government.

Appearing on the ballot doesn't mean that you have been vetted by federal law enforcement agencies; they're simply not in that business.

You can't be arrested while being president is a myth. If you committed a felony prior to becoming president you can be arrested for a felony while President oh, you just can't be arrested for committing a crime while you're in an office just like Nixon did.
 

hillberg

Super Member
Joined
May 24, 2010
Messages
4,308
Location
Low Earth Orbit
So these fools forgot Russia Russia Russia , Spermy Danials , Ellen Show with Donny's taxes, Muller time, Avanetti the creepy porn lawyer, Peach 45.

Rona Rona Rona , Ruthie on Ice . New Supreme Court Justice. now it's TAXES TAXES TAXES!

Trump is playing the DNC Communists like a cheap violin - When the vote of Supreme Court goes down you boobs will miss it.

But Muh Taxes! The latest shiny thing sparkling in your eyes children.

Trump can still dust off the Impeachment Clause they have on the books "If a President is Impeached and found innocent he may have 3 years as Remedy to the office of President for wasting the peoples time", Nixon resigned Clinton was found guilty Trump was Innocent.

I can see their heads exploding already 🤗
 

WaspAir

Supreme Allied Gyro CFI
Joined
Oct 21, 2006
Messages
4,979
Location
Colorado front range
Aircraft
Bell 47G-3B-1 / A&S 18A / Phoebus C, etc.
Total Flight Time
stopped caring at 1000
You can't be arrested while being president is a myth. If you committed a felony prior to becoming president you can be arrested for a felony while President oh, you just can't be arrested for committing a crime while you're in an office just like Nixon did.
Try telling that to the U.S Department of Justice, who firmly believe that "myth" and are the ones who would typically be expected to do the arresting. When the crime was committed is irrelevant to them; the question is whether legal action on it can be taken while currently in office, or must wait until the term of office ends. They view it like this: Still sitting? If yes, then immune from prosecution.

Read this mythbuster:


If you lack the patience for all that, here's the last bit:

Balancing these competing concerns, we believe the better view is the one advanced by the Department in 1973: a sitting President is immune from indictment as well as from further criminal process. Where the President is concerned, only the House of Representatives has the authority to bring charges of criminal misconduct through the constitutionally sanctioned process of impeachment.in. In 1973, the Department of Justice concluded that the indictment and criminal prosecution of a sitting President would unduly interfere with the ability of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned duties, and would thus violate the constitutional separation of powers. No court has addressed this question directly, but the judicial precedents that bear on the continuing validity of our constitutional analysis are consistent with both the analytic approach taken and the conclusions reached. Our view remains that a sitting President is constitutionally immune from indictment and criminal prosecution. RANDOLPH D. MOSS Assistant Attorney General
 

WaspAir

Supreme Allied Gyro CFI
Joined
Oct 21, 2006
Messages
4,979
Location
Colorado front range
Aircraft
Bell 47G-3B-1 / A&S 18A / Phoebus C, etc.
Total Flight Time
stopped caring at 1000
Trump can still dust off the Impeachment Clause they have on the books "If a President is Impeached and found innocent he may have 3 years as Remedy to the office of President for wasting the peoples time", Nixon resigned Clinton was found guilty Trump was Innocent.
Just where exactly is that on the books? It's not in the U.S. Constitution.


(By the way, Clinton was acquitted by a Senate vote along party lines, and served out his full eight years; he didn't get three more.)
 
Last edited:

skyguynca

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2004
Messages
1,944
Location
Acampo, CA
Aircraft
depends on what I have sold recently
Total Flight Time
5000+
Try telling that to the U.S Department of Justice, who firmly believe that "myth" and are the ones who would typically be expected to do the arresting. When the crime was committed is irrelevant to them; the question is whether legal action on it can be taken while currently in office, or must wait until the term of office ends. They view it like this: Still sitting? If yes, then immune from prosecution.

Read this mythbuster:


If you lack the patience for all that, here's the last bit:

Balancing these competing concerns, we believe the better view is the one advanced by the Department in 1973: a sitting President is immune from indictment as well as from further criminal process. Where the President is concerned, only the House of Representatives has the authority to bring charges of criminal misconduct through the constitutionally sanctioned process of impeachment.in. In 1973, the Department of Justice concluded that the indictment and criminal prosecution of a sitting President would unduly interfere with the ability of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned duties, and would thus violate the constitutional separation of powers. No court has addressed this question directly, but the judicial precedents that bear on the continuing validity of our constitutional analysis are consistent with both the analytic approach taken and the conclusions reached. Our view remains that a sitting President is constitutionally immune from indictment and criminal prosecution. RANDOLPH D. MOSS Assistant Attorney General

No he can be arrested and charged, but he can't be prosecuted cuz it takes them away from the business of taking care of the country. However he can be prosecuted after he leaves office. Generally elected officials usually are not charged until they can be prosecuted, however usually a statue of limitations has passed so they can't even be charged after they get out of office

And this has nothing to do with the fact that they said that they have Decades of trump taxes showing he defrauded the IRS. He could have been prosecuted long before he went into office if it was the hundred million dollars they claim. But it's not it's all fake that's why they can't produce their evidence for the public to see.


Has anyone besides me realized that Trump re-election team, his personal lawyer Sekulow & Giuliani have all gone through foia request to gain legal evidence of the sedition and the attempt to overthrow a duly elected president proof, solid proof that they make available for the public. They don't hide it in make unsubstantiated complaints

They also legally went to the Ukraine and the Ukraine legally gave him copies that shows Hunter Biden was in cahoots with Buarisma and that it was all orchestrated by Joe Biden to get rid of the prosecutor to keep the company's owner out of jail and of course his son Hunter out of jail too. They got the paperwork illegally and made it available for public viewing and yet the Dems still call it fake.

Or how about Tom fitton over Judicial Watch who was uncovered thousands of documents that show Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, Barack Obama all broke the law and yet all collected the documents legally and the Dems call those fake too.

Yet every single scrap of what they call evidence against Trump is illegally obtained if it actually exists, but they never show it to anyone to proved it's real evidence
 
Last edited:

hillberg

Super Member
Joined
May 24, 2010
Messages
4,308
Location
Low Earth Orbit
You can't be arrested while being president is a myth. If you committed a felony prior to becoming president you can be arrested for a felony while President oh, you just can't be arrested for committing a crime while you're in an office just like Nixon did.
Actually when in office you have Remedy ie: removal / fine. Once out of office prosecution -
Nixon quit = Remedy out of office
Slick Willys rapes =Remedy $800,000 fine/restitution
Donny =Impeachment Remedy pending (Sometimes the remedy is a good thing🤗)
 

hillberg

Super Member
Joined
May 24, 2010
Messages
4,308
Location
Low Earth Orbit
Just where exactly is that on the books? It's not in the U.S. Constitution.


(By the way, Clinton was acquitted by a Senate vote along party lines, and served out his full eight years; he didn't get three more.)
Supreme Court and Congressional remedy just in case Nixon was found innocent - Still on the books as Nixon quit. Never used.
 

kolibri282

Super Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2009
Messages
3,303
Location
Duesseldorf
Quote: cuz it takes them away from the business of taking care of the country. /Quote
That's no problem, the Donald has never taken care of the country. 200.000 plus COVID deaths lie on the Donald's shoulders. The US still by far leads over all other rat hole countries.
 

Attachments

  • 91-DIVOC-countries_US_Brz_Ind.png
    91-DIVOC-countries_US_Brz_Ind.png
    61.2 KB · Views: 0

hillberg

Super Member
Joined
May 24, 2010
Messages
4,308
Location
Low Earth Orbit
Just where exactly is that on the books? It's not in the U.S. Constitution.


(By the way, Clinton was acquitted by a Senate vote along party lines, and served out his full eight years; he didn't get three more.)
Clinton had to pay restitution of $800,000 = guilty but not removed
 

skyguynca

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2004
Messages
1,944
Location
Acampo, CA
Aircraft
depends on what I have sold recently
Total Flight Time
5000+
Just where exactly is that on the books? It's not in the U.S. Constitution.


(By the way, Clinton was acquitted by a Senate vote along party lines, and served out his full eight years; he didn't get three more.)

Well that doesn't matter, Pelosi says you're impeached forever
 

WaspAir

Supreme Allied Gyro CFI
Joined
Oct 21, 2006
Messages
4,979
Location
Colorado front range
Aircraft
Bell 47G-3B-1 / A&S 18A / Phoebus C, etc.
Total Flight Time
stopped caring at 1000
No he can be arrested and charged, but he can't be prosecuted cuz it takes them away from the business of taking care of the country. However he can be prosecuted after he leaves office. Generally elected officials usually are not charged until they can be prosecuted, however usually a statue of limitations has passed so they can't even be charged after they get out of office
"Charging" and "indictment" are the same thing, and DOJ says no indicting.
Read Justice Scalia's opinion in Young v. United States, suggesting that all statutes of limitation are subject to what is generally known as "equitable tolling" (that means a court can consider the clock to have been stopped during a temporary period of immunity).
 

hillberg

Super Member
Joined
May 24, 2010
Messages
4,308
Location
Low Earth Orbit
Quote: cuz it takes them away from the business of taking care of the country. /Quote
That's no problem, the Donald has never taken care of the country. 200.000 plus COVID deaths lie on the Donald's shoulders.
You can fault the Democrats and their illegal investigations & Impeachment that went nowhere. Lotion? the CDC has 12,000 odd deaths -try again.

Peace with North Korea. Economic policies that work, Peace in the Middle East, Cleaning the corruption out of the FBI, DOJ, DC.🤗
Just think if you lived here you'd have more take home pay - Think of all the SS uniforms and ball gags you could buy! Your own porn studio too!
 

WaspAir

Supreme Allied Gyro CFI
Joined
Oct 21, 2006
Messages
4,979
Location
Colorado front range
Aircraft
Bell 47G-3B-1 / A&S 18A / Phoebus C, etc.
Total Flight Time
stopped caring at 1000
Clinton had to pay restitution of $800,000 = guilty but not removed

Clinton was acquitted by the Senate, just like Trump; neither was found guilty. Each of them had a majority of their own party in the Senate at the time, and each trial went exactly as could have been predicted from counting party membership. This is history, not opinion.

There is no middle ground in impeachment trials to provide for "guilty but not removed". You stay in office, or you don't. There are no fines that can be assessed. The only remedy the Senate has is removal from office.

Clinton didn't pay anything arising from the impeachment. He faced civil suits after he left office and action against his Arkansas law license, but that's separate from the Congressional action.
 

hillberg

Super Member
Joined
May 24, 2010
Messages
4,308
Location
Low Earth Orbit
Clinton was acquitted by the Senate, just like Trump; neither was found guilty. Each of them had a majority of their own party in the Senate at the time, and each trial went exactly as could have been predicted from counting party membership. This is history, not opinion.

There is no middle ground in impeachment trials to provide for "guilty but not removed". You stay in office, or you don't. There are no fines that can be assessed. The only remedy the Senate has is removal from office.

Clinton didn't pay anything arising from the impeachment. He faced civil suits after he left office and action against his Arkansas law license, but that's separate from the Congressional action.
Check the congressional record. Slick willy though not removed was found guilty of his actions and had to pay restitution of $800,000 to the victims (Remedy) Impeachment is a political process limited to Remedy. Not criminal . His lying to Congress wasn't enough for his removal. but his law license was taken, (more remedy)

But his other issues with the victims had to be addressed - Remedy = pay restitution. That's the Government way.

Then Hillary stole the White House Silverware and claimed the two were flat broke...
 

WaspAir

Supreme Allied Gyro CFI
Joined
Oct 21, 2006
Messages
4,979
Location
Colorado front range
Aircraft
Bell 47G-3B-1 / A&S 18A / Phoebus C, etc.
Total Flight Time
stopped caring at 1000
Supreme Court and Congressional remedy just in case Nixon was found innocent - Still on the books as Nixon quit. Never used.
Sorry, but that's utter nonsense. It would have to have been a Constitutional Amendment, and there simply never has been one like that (it's easy to check -- look up the Amendments).

Either you're making stuff up, or you have a really lousy memory from 1973-4.
 
Top