BREAKING: Supreme Court Agrees to Hear Trump Presidential Immunity Claim in Jack Smith January 6 Case - The Great Awakening

BREAKING: Supreme Court Agrees to Hear Trump Presidential Immunity Claim in Jack Smith January 6 Case (www.thegatewaypundit.com) LET'S GOOoOoooo!!!

posted 268 days ago by LakotaPride 268 days ago by LakotaPride +256 / -0

BREAKING: Supreme Court Agrees to Hear Trump Presidential Immunity Claim in Jack Smith January 6 Case | The Gateway Pundit | by ...

The US Supreme Court on Wednesday agreed to hear Trump’s presidential immunity claim in Special Counsel Jack Smith’s January 6 case in Washington, DC.

40 comments

40 comments share save hide report block hide replies

You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.

Comments (40)

sorted by:

▲ 12 ▼

– Cyberhawk 12 points 268 days ago +12 / -0

But we don’t need Trump to have immunity. If he gets it, so do the others like Obama, Bush, Biden, etc. I feel this is going to the Supreme Court to get an official NO immunity, and set the precedent.

permalink save report block reply

▲ 5 ▼

– LakotaPride [S] 5 points 268 days ago +5 / -0

President Trump will not get immunity for the very reasons you point out. This will boomerang back on the real criminals in the past. DS fell for the bait.

permalink parent save report block reply

▲ 3 ▼

– therobots 3 points 268 days ago +3 / -0

But what about the future?

Presidents can be sued into oblivion.

permalink parent save report block reply

▲ 2 ▼

– LakotaPride [S] 2 points 268 days ago +2 / -0

Appears we have to wait and see what is decided in April.

permalink parent save report block reply

To The Great Awakening

We are researchers who deal in open-source information, reasoned argument, and dank memes. We do battle in the sphere of ideas and ideas only. We neither need nor condone the use of force in our work here. WE ARE THE PUBLIC FACE OF Q. OUR MISSION IS TO RED-PILL NORMIES.

This is a pro-Q community. Please read and respect our rules below before contributing.

WHY Q?

"Those who cannot understand that we cannot simply start arresting w/o first: ensuring the safety & well-being of the population shifting the narrative removing those in DC through resignation to ensure success defeating ISIS/MS13 to prevent fail-safes freezing assets to remove network-to-network abilities kill off COC to prevent top-down comms/org, etc. etc. should not be participating in discussions." Q