Mental note - don't shake hands with u/Bibloop unless they wash their hands.

That's just it. Impeachment is not required, and doesn't remove immunity anyway. That would have to be ruled on by the judiciary - not CONgress. Immunity shouldn't actually matter for an impeachment - only a criminal trial. Remember - impeachment isn't a criminal trial. It is a purely political procedure to remove an officer from office, and restrict them for life. The President would still have their immunity for any legal actions. Treason of course is not a legal core Presidential action, so Biden could be prosecuted for that and impeachment would not be required or necessary. Because impeachment is not criminal, double jeopardy does not come into play either - even if CONgress decides to do an impeachment.

In your example of treason before assuming office, that might be possible because the Constitution is very vague on this. It says "high crimes and misdemeanors" of course, but interestingly it does not actually restrict when those crimes took place. It could mean only during the time in office, or it could include actions before the presidency, meaning that a future President did not have the character to actually be POTUS. I don't think CONgress would convict on something before a presidency, when they could defer to the DOJ for charges (assuming a fair DOJ). Also - even if an impeachment was tried and it failed -- or succeeded, civilian charges and a trial would still be held.

An impeachment would be a waste of time and energy. Look at the last 2 Presidents who were impeached. They meant nothing. Clinton completed his term. Trump (twice) completed his term - and is now serving another. Both were impeached, but neither one was convicted in the Senate. Biden would possibly be impeached if it happened while the Republicans hold the House. He would very likely be acquitted in the Senate since a 2/3 vote (67 out of 100 Senators) would be required. It would also be dangerous, as the MSM would carry the water for the demons and poison the already left-leaning jury pools for any criminal trial. ("Look - see? Even CONgress doesn't believe he committed treason." - CNN)

Thanks by the way for this back and forth. I love stuff like this because it not only makes me think and learn more, but the anons reading this get to do the same.

That's what I said.

Presidents still have immunity over valid Presidential actions, but anything he did that was illegal (not covered by immunity) can be used against him.

The SCOTUS ruling said Presidents retained immunity for any legal actions they did under recognized Presidential Authority. They are given wide leeway, but if for example a President walked over to CONgress and shot the Speaker in the head he would not have immunity.

I asked Grok to briefly explain the ruling:

In Trump v. United States (July 1, 2024), the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that former presidents have absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within their core constitutional powers (e.g., pardons, military command) and presumptive immunity for other official acts within the "outer perimeter" of their responsibilities. No immunity applies to unofficial or private acts. The decision, split along ideological lines, delays Donald Trump's 2020 election interference case by remanding it to lower courts to determine which acts are official or unofficial, likely preventing a trial before the 2024 election. Critics argue it weakens accountability, while supporters claim it protects executive function.

Great exaggerated take from a handshake account 2 days old. Way to lump Alito and Thomas in there.

BTW, nobody ever complained about Cuba holding prisoners for America in Gitmo

Maybe that is because Cuba has nothing to do with our base - which is wholly operated by the US Military. We have a lease with no expiration date, and jurisdiction over that space. While it is still Cuba, they have no control over it. Basically that swath of land is treated as part of America thanks to the multiple treaties that allowed the lease.

I think you are mistaken here. Impeachment is the only way when someone is in office. Once they are out they are fair game. Presidents still have immunity over valid Presidential actions, but anything he did that was illegal (not covered by immunity) can be used against him.

The only reason to do an impeachment on someone out of office is to try to keep them from ever having another office - as in revenge.

😀

No worries - I do that sometimes myself.

Jorge. "Whore Hay"

Do like they did in the old days. Put them on a horse, put the noose on, and slap the horse. Except this time strap the person to the horse and see what happens. For science.

The remake will probably be a Ramadan movie.

Give us an actual URL and not a google search for "blue origin female crew"...

This could actually be fun for you guys. Beat them at their own game.

If they are mandating all of these requirements on you, sue them for theft. They are treating you like employees and requiring work from you, so turn it in and then sue them when they don't give you the same money they give their government school employees. Sue them for not requiring their teachers to do the same. Sue them for not providing your "school" the same funding they provide the other govt schools. Force them to defend the different policies in court. Sue them for not providing school breakfasts and lunches. Anything you can think of, hit them with it.

Then hit them with Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law.

EVERY SINGLE HOMESCHOOL FAMILY should do this.

Prosecutors said Lodge stole everything from brains to skin and bones from the Massachusetts morgue and smuggled them to him home in Goffstown, New Hampshire, where he and his wife flogged them.

Today I learned that "flogged" in UK English means "sold". I also reaffirmed that The Daily Mail needs to do a better job at spell-checking/editing.

I had pictures in my mind of this guy hanging heads from a ceiling and beating them repeatedly with a whip or a rod.

We need to consider that this isn't what happened.

Could it have been Ukrainians? Sure.

Could it have been an FBI/CIA/DS op saying they were Ukrainian? Equally plausible.

Just look at history. JFK/MLK/RFK were likely govt ops. FBI was the driving factor in the whole Michigan Gov Whitmer plot. Patriot Front. J6. Crossfire Hurricane and Seth Rich. MK Ultra. The last 2 assassination attempts on Trump. The list is endless.

Checks out per the old saying: Liquor in the front, poker in the rear.

Find a stupid CONgressman (which is pretty easy).

You forgot a big one - drop an anchor baby.

I used to work at a big tech company in Austin in the early 2000s. Back then I still smoked. I would stand outside having a cigarette and just get pissed off at the number of Chinese employees that were transferred there when they were coincidentally pregnant. I would watch 5 or 6 of them walking laps around the complex every day until one of them would disappear - they had their baby. Then a new pregnant Chinese woman would show up. It was non-stop. The company was bringing them in from their Asia offices to drop a kid, get the US passport and birth certificate, and go back until the kid is old enough to come back and bring their parents and siblings.

I never saw any of them actually work - just walk laps to speed up the anchor dropping.

The first Logan Act charge should be John Kerry.

Did they say it was sex trafficking? I only heard trafficking, which could be sex, labor, adoption, organ, servitude, or others. There are many kinds of trafficking. It would help if we knew which kind he was suspected of.

I didn't notice who it was, but someone on X said it was an Asian female. Maybe this one? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weijia_Jiang

POTUS or Bondi should respond back to the Judge's 46 page report with a post-it note that simply says: TL;DR

From CONgress.

Different type of swing, but maybe that is part of his blackmail. He could be a swinger and attended some of those swinger parties CONgress supposedly throws.

I saw it on OAN live.