'Not Sure I Understand Your Answer': ACB Grills Jack Smith's Lawyer In Trump Immunity Case

Justice Amy Coney Barrett questions Special Counsel Jack Smith's attorney Michael Dreeben in oral arguments for Trump v. United States.
Fuel your success with Forbes. Gain unlimited access to premium journalism, including breaking news, groundbreaking in-depth reported stories, daily digests and more. Plus, members get a front-row seat at members-only events with leading thinkers and doers, access to premium video that can help you get ahead, an ad-light experience, early access to select products including NFT drops and more:
account.forbes.com/membership...
Stay Connected
Forbes on Facebook: forbes
Forbes Video on Twitter: / forbes
Forbes Video on Instagram: / forbes
More From Forbes: forbes.com

[@TheThumbBreakers]

Funny that we are getting plenty of Trump court trials….but when the world’s biggest child sex trafficker was put in trial, we got crickets. Do you people see the problem here.

[@kinngrimm]

Sure. Some people don't get that the claim to immunity of presidents could lead to worse outcomes than not having sex traficking scandals all the time all over the news.

[@joanofarc4103]

Or a president too inept to be tried for classified documents for over 59 years...but can run the country?

[@shaffey01]

That list probably is more powerful than the President

[@Sliceofthepie88]

hahha.... very funny.

[@sugarfalls1]

At the risk of sounding stupid, who is that? I follow the news very closely and I'm not sure who you're referring to exactly. And I agree with you, Donald Trump has been treated completely unfairly and it is a witch hunt and our votes were stolen. I just voted for Trump in our PA primary and plan to again on November 5th! Straight Republican!

[@gordonlecroy4258]

An example of "acting outside of his authority" would be forgiving student loans.

[@dwaynejordan5898]

Many presidents and congress forgave bank debt after housing crisis and the banks then paid their senior execs the biggest bonuses ever seen.

[@docbob2220]

​@@dwaynejordan5898 congress has the authority to pass laws , a senile president doesn't

[@nancygawlowicz2562]

Or making the taxpayers pay off the student loans.

[@Red-vn4xq]

No President can override, overthrow the Constitution of America. It's treasonous to do so.

[@stanrapp4834]

Well, I learned something. "Forbes Breaking News" is a MAGA bullshit website.

[@Patrick-rf3zu]

This is ridiculous! The Supreme Court has to do the right thing and stop this CRAZINESS from DOJ!!!

[@generaljackson1741]

its not gonna happen. they SHOULD. if roles were reversed, the media would be outraged. Isnt it funny how they waited til an election year to come up with all these charges

[@user-dz2ej6kx9l]

The DOJ has a CONSTITUTIONAL right to bring ANY case within their jurisdiction that is found by a grand jury to have the evidence that shows that more likely than not a crime was committed. The DOJ would not BRING a case that they feel would not result in a conviction. NO layer would! If anything, blame it on the GRAND JURY! Better yet, blame it on the laws of this land, the CONSTITUTION! Everyone associated with this case is following it, the constitution...Even Trump right NOW!

[@UbiquitousRomp]

@@user-dz2ej6kx9l It's a witch hunt using law fare. The whole world is watching this discussing abuse of the DoJ.

[@davidmcgoat2924]

@@user-dz2ej6kx9l "The DOJ would not BRING a case that they feel would not result in a conviction." that is not true they do it all the time in hopes for a plea deal.. Please get a refund on your law degree...

[@Patrick-rf3zu]

@@davidmcgoat2924 yuuuuup.

[@ps603]

I hope the SCOTUS puts a stop to this illegal lawfare..

[@x3dominator28]

Robert’s is not happy with the way the democrats are abusing the system for sure.

[@flightlessboid]

Other than backasswards, you've really nailed it.

[@sandrarufus8198]

trump Have NO LEGAL STANDING!!!

[@drudru5992]

Even Mr. Wonder can see what this is about.

[@SurfinMonky240]

If they don't, every president will be prosecuted by the other side for the rest of time...with sooooo much shady stuff that happens in the deep state, they'd be wise to stop it.

[@johnbrittingham4471]

What about a sitting president using the federal government to go after his political opponent.

[@sonnypruitt6639]

Gee, why couldn't the Supreme Court Justices come up with that question?!

[@tommas2674]

using our money to BRIBE GROUPS, ... other Treasons.

[@Cmez872]

Only Trump attempted to do that, repeatedly through Barr

[@Calbeck]

@@Cmez872 When?

[@Cmez872]

@@mrtyeehunter look up the word “attempted”, Trump attempted to get Barr to prosecute Clinton, and others, FACT. Trump is 💯 responsible for his own legal problems, 💯.

[@mervynlewis1044]

If a president has to get permission for anything, then the person giving permission is the defacto president.

[@jamesmooney8933]

Correct!!!

[@hugegoogle]

If prosecutor who hates the president and together with a judge also sides with her conduct a trial and convicts the president then those couple people are more powerful than an elected president.

[@Mokz121]

I would think that's Congress, sadly the real problem / rulers of our country.

[@user-qx2tk4sq9b]

If any prosecutor in the US can dictate what a president can do. Like they have been trying to do. We have serious problems like we are seeing today.

[@joeblow1942]

A US president that can do anything isn’t a president. That is a monarch.

[@michaeldavid2873]

The DOJ is stepping way out of their box. Splitting hairs. This whole thing is stupid.

[@delsoulwilliams2780]

And costing the tax payer.

[@user-dz2ej6kx9l]

You're OKAY with being manipulated, controlled, USED to gain the most POWERFUL seat in the WORLD??? You obviously don't understand what holding that position means!

[@delsoulwilliams2780]

It obviously means nothing NOW as it is being manipulate as we speak. They have made it a place holder seat while they work feverishly behind the curtain to break and remake America and the constitution. This is all made up, bogus and never done before in the country’s history. Why is this being brought up now??? Think 🤔 and wake up!

[@newtonfirefly3584]

@@delsoulwilliams2780 OH, You claims are actually common, falsehood, pretense, distortions, LIES, misconceptions, intentionally misleading portrayals, narratives by politicians, media and others. A. The Congress via both Houses, determine and appropriate all funds for US Federal Departments, Agencies, actions, programs, etc. -> not the citizens B. The actions of with, within any Department, Agency, its employees are paid for via the appropriations through the US Treasury =-> not taxes C. The amount available for all appropriations in the US Treasury is a combination of all taxes collected [import, export, use, income, etc. ] from each legal channel, means, along with other values [as gold reserves], loans [all from Federal Reserve since Federal Reserve Act 1913] D. Any action performed by any Department, Agency has costs which are paid for via the requested budget E. any additional funds which are required, necessary,needed are specifically requested to, then determined, appropriated via Congress as the budget(s) including specific programs. F => therefore any such prosecutions as these do not require and additional funding, thus no additional costs, nor collection of taxes, nor loans from the Federal Reserve G. In fact [FACTs MATTER], only a portion, fraction of appropriated funds by US Congress are from collected taxes while the majority are from loans via Federal Reserve, thus the Debt to the Federal Reserve increases significantly each year. in the range of $T's which are borrowed each year H. The increase with debt, borrowed funds, dollar values results directly with, in Inflation and currency Devaluation. additional note: I. Clearly all of these prosecutions, including indictments are certainly based in contrived, devised, conjured falsehood, pretense, distortions of the Law, US Constitution, claims, along certain illegal, unlawful, Unconstitutional Search & Seizure, direct violations of, with, within the Fourth Amendment [read explicit, clear statement], also First Amendment not just protection of "Freedom of Speech", also Assembly, "Redress of Government", thus formal suits, requests, investigations, etc., along with invalid use of the Espionage Act [only applies to at most "Secret" and Top Secret", special clearance level information, knowledge, materials, documents transferred to an enemy whether individual, nation, country, or its government and its people within 1. The US President, VP, Congress do NOT have any DoD, other Agency clearances, there for no access to the materials, information, knowledge, documents, nor certainly within any of their residences any proper means to, for, with storage of such Classified information, knowledge, documents. 2. Only individuals, government officials, officers which were granted clearances previously, prior to their elected, or appointed government position will have any such clearance for, with, "Secret" , "Top Secret", special classification along with the requirement of "Need to Know" any specific detail, information, knowledge, document or access. 3. The highest, and only levels of Classified Materials, Information, Knowledge, Documents which any of these elected, appointed individuals may have access, knowledge, etc., without previous clearances, are "Private" and "Confidential", if given the clearance along with "The Need to Know". 4. The only possible materials, information, knowledge, documents which any President, VP, Congress member, Department, Agency appointed official may have access, or possession are within "Private" and "Confidential"; just as the claims, statements from James Coney about Hillary Clinton Department of State "Confidential" documents which were found on computers, servers outside of, in violation of, with, within the proper handling Rules 5. Any mishandling with any classified materials, information, knowledge, documents are violations of the Rules which may result in loss of the Clearance at most, even for the highest level and special classification. 6. Espionage Act explicitly applies only to the highest levels and special clearance classifications, along with the direct transfer to an enemy [with intent according James Comey] now with DOJ prosecutor Hur, added a requirement with mental capacity, competence to prosecute. 7. Certainly All of the individuals within National Archives, FBI agents, including special agent who applied for the search & seizure warrant, all prosecutors, lawyers including Jack Smith, this woman [which appeared before USSC - spoke in this recording], lawyers, Judges involved at every level lack any necessary Clearances to view, see, hear, know, access any Classified information, knowledge, materials, documents which can be prosecuted within the Espionage Act 8. the provided, posted photos by the FBI of folders, printed pages with the red "Top Secret" markings are typical false "Hollywood", theatrical type markings, along with portrayals, narratives used explicitly, seen within many motion pictures, television shows, etc., as James Bond, Mission Impossible, other military portrayals, etc., but are actually not the required, proper legal markings as defined, specified within the US DoD, Classificaiton document [see actual required marking per available, non-classified document] J. => Thus, certainly all of this case prosecuted by Jack Smith, along with the FBI posted photos, Search & Seizure, warrant request, approval are within a certain "Political Theater", "Sham", "Scam", illegal, unlawful, Unconstitutional, violations within Individual Rights & freedoms [1A, 4A, 9A, 10A, 14A-S1] K. Note the PPA, Patriot Act, FISA are all direct violations of, with, within 1A, 4A, also each Federal, State, County, Locale legislation, Constitution laws which limit, restrict, regulate, etc. any aspect with all Arms are certainly directly in violation with 2A, ".. shall not be infringed" L. Also all claims about any "Presidential/VP" Election with any, all of the States, thus National along with the actual Election within Congress by EC Elector cast Ballots as "certification" is complete falsehood, pretense, distortion, LIES, False claims, portrayals, narratives, Nonsense, InDOCtrination, Propaganda, "Political Theater" opposition and violations against the explicit, detailed process of the US President, VP via EC Electors determined by State Legislators, which is defined detailed in the USC A II, S1 + 12A. => Please read, comprehend, know USC: -> constitution.congress.gov/constitution/ => then act, legally, properly within the USC and execute Your 1A Rights to Redress the Government within legal opposition, challenge, suits in US Federal & Supreme Courts All The Best, Sincerely

[@norbertamberg8730]

@@user-dz2ej6kx9l No one is ok with getting intelligence agents to sign a letter that lies about actual facts, no one is ok with using the FBI to pay media outlets to kill stories to influence the outcome of an election. No one is ok with paying foreign agents to lie about opposing candidates.

[@robertwunderlich9168]

We’re spending a shit ton of our tax money trying to wrongfully prosecute somebody because they don’t want him to be president. This is pathetic.

[@Jessicachico2288]

That's a understatement for the BS that's happening, I would not believe it if I wasn't seeing it

[@roccoravello4738]

Doesn’t that though gives you reasons to understand what the Democrats are really doing to our country??

[@bobbypinkston9374]

Ok, so when he refused to comply with multiple warnings and subpoenas for return of classified documents and then went out of his way to hide them, we’re just supposed to do what? Say “he’s an ex president, let’s just drop it.” What on earth are people so willing to die for this undeserving man for? The Republican Party has much better candidates and far more worth people. Stop making excuses from the supposed “party of law and order.”

[@skipwatson5258]

​@bobbypinkston9374 so, now that evidence has come out that Jack Smith, and the FBI has been caught tampering with evidence, and placing documents into the court case that were not in the original digital document scans from the original confiscation, and the judge has indefinitely suspended the court case around those documents, and has indicated the case will be thrown out, will you amend your statement and admit he did nothing wrong in this case? Because you should.

[@bobbypinkston9374]

@@skipwatson5258 that’s not remotely what happened. Cannon just said she wants all the reclassifications done and pre-trial motions, most of which Trump’s team filed, and that there are too many to set a trial date. She was a judge he appointed. If Obama had a criminal trial being overseen by a judge in his home district that he appointed, you would demand a new judge, and you’re lying if you said you wouldn’t. She has been knocked back multiple times by the appeals court for motions she made on trumps behalf. She has done everything she can to make the trial impossible to proceed before the election. You can go look at the evidence yourself. You can read the transcripts. You can look at his flight log and what boxes were on it. You can see what he told his lawyers about lying to the government and their refusal. Why are people protecting this man who has betrayed them over and over? He is getting supreme preferential treatment and everyone seems to be ok with it.

[@valar7568]

Only lawyers can speak so much and say so little to so many.

[@dwaynejordan5898]

If you didnt understand much from this then u should wait on the tv pundits. It quite clear and understandable what the discussion was about.

[@valar7568]

@@dwaynejordan5898 yea, if you speak Lawyer gibberish. Which you do apparently.🙄

[@craigs.handle]

I've seen third graders do it too.

[@alankwellsmsmba]

@@craigs.handle Lawyers become lawyers because they can't be doctors, physicists engineers or do math. The only dumber occupation is politician (when they're not also lawyers).

[@valar7568]

@@craigs.handle yes third graders understand gibberish better than adults do.

[@marymurphy3773]

What about a corrupt DOJ..?

[@mikedavis4851]

Barr isn't the head of it anymore its better shape now.😊

[@dwaynejordan5898]

Corrupt DOJ still need to present evidence in court!!!!

[@eddiecaruth7704]

They're at school board meetings and church parking lots.

[@mega13man1]

Micheal Dreeben .. wasn't he on the leaky Bob Mueller Special Counsel?

[@kctaz6189]

@@mikedavis4851 No, it's not better. I was no fan of Barr but the DOJ is way worse now.

[@factfinder4839]

what a bunch of crap, this is exactly why the founders didnt allow "lawyers" in government.

[@jaredburks2156]

35 of the 55 people who signed the constitution were lawyers...

[@GringoAzteco]

⁉️ The 2nd President of the United States 🇺🇸 John Adam’s was a lawyer by profession.

[@gustavotonnelli]

@@GringoAzteco He said “lawyers” not lawyers

[@user-xi9zw3ww7r]

They are way too many lawyers and government

[@christianschultz4985]

56 men signed the Declaration of Independence. Nearly half, 25, were lawyers. The second most common occupation (after military service - which includes some lawyers in that category) of presidents is the practice of law. Of the first 6 presidents, all of whom we may refer to as "founders" 5 were lawyers. John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Madison wasn't a lawyer (though he considered becoming one) but he wrote the Constitution the foundation of our entire legal system, James Monroe, John Quincy Adams. Not sure where you found your premise regarding lawyers but it is inaccurate.

[@dddhhh2612]

It absolutely outstanding that Forbes is showing these SCOTUS sessions. It is actually making Americans smarter. We need that to counteract all the media garbage and Twitter garbage. A big thank you goes out to Forbes!

[@damianmensch8224]

MSNBC and CNN also have been...

[@buffalosabresloyalist8913]

Live hearings have been available for a long time. CSPAN carries Congress, both houses, and SCOTUS, regularly.

[@buffalosabresloyalist8913]

​@@damianmensch8224they aren't trust worthy of not going to commercial when they don't want us to hear something.

[@ryoder6279]

Questioning the legitimacy of state election results in lieu of illegal modification of election protocol is not a private/personal act…it’s definitely a justifiable official act.

[@CamMcB]

Think the Supreme Court poses the entire hearing on their web site on fridays

[@jggrimm]

my understanding of right and wrong is not predicated on lawyer talk. this trial is a fucking political hate crime.

[@AWOLCPA]

What a simplistic perspective. Ignorance is bliss.

[@CollectorsCrib-gs2pe]

No its a sham nobody is above the law Next

[@whyami8024]

@@CollectorsCrib-gs2pe Democratic Rep. Jamaal Bowman ...ring a bell?

[@Mattshank-uo6jl]

@@CollectorsCrib-gs2pe bullshit! These so-called cases are built on contorted law being twisted to have effect on an election. It is Marxist, unprecedented, and criminal in its election interference implications. Maybe you leftists should all move to Venezuela, Cuba, China or Russia if you embrace such edicts. Re: "Nobody is above the law" so we're waiting on the obvious criminality of Biden in his theft of senstive docs as a Senator, or his corruption in receiving funds from adversaries which most certainly explains his policies that have benefitted said adversaries. You can't have it both ways! NEXT!

[@NickYankee]

you're confused. This is based on Trump's argument that he is immune to prosecution. The lower courts already ruled against him.

[@cntrlscrutinizer5374]

This guy is tap dancing all over the place with his bullsht!

[@stanrapp4834]

Hey Trump really got that wall built, eh?

[@chuckintexas]

​@@stanrapp4834 - He DID , 👍 _AND _ almost had it FINISHED , with MEXICO'S _HELP_ *_paying_* for guarding THEIR side 👍! Any remaining GAPS were ALL DEMOCRAT, with Biden pulling DOWN what he _could_ and CANCELLING the _rest_ , only to let it ROT in the sun and weather . You WELL know *ALL of this* , and *WE DO **_TOO_* .

[@leahrolan1265]

​@@stanrapp4834everything was there to build it. Biden stopped it and paid millions to contractors to not build it. Then he sold the supplies to build the wall for dirt cheap.

[@danmadison5087]

He sounds like he's tap dancing on his tongue too. Or should I say thoo

[@Emjaygee1950]

@@stanrapp4834 you need to up your anti TDS meds, they're clearly not working as intended !

[@charlesharris9965]

6:30 Wait. What did he say? "We are trying to design a system?" I'm confused. I thought that we already have a system called the Constitution of the United States. According to the Constitution, the President is a separate Branch of Government that is not subject to any review by the Judicial Branch unless the Legislative Branch has impeached and convicted him first. 🤔 By virtue of his job description, everything he does is an official act unless Congress has determined that it was not official. The "system" that this moron is trying to create has already been created and been in use for 234 years. There is no need to reinvent the wheel here. Just use the system that is already in place.

[@angelajung6655]

Exactly! Well said. 👍

[@danieldimarinomusic7754]

Yes, Im confused where this whole distinction between “private” and “official” conduct is coming from. Anyone able to help me understand this better?

[@charlesharris9965]

@danieldimarinomusic7754 The President is President 24/7/365. As such, he can be acting in a private capacity (like a candidate for office) or in his official capacity as President attempting to ensure that the election laws are faithfully executed. The problem is that first term presidents are always looking for ways to enhance their reelection chances in virtually everything they do. So where do you draw the line between official and private conduct, and who is authorized to make that determination in regards to the President? The impeachment process is designed to make that determination and is the only constitutionally available method in which to do so. Article III Courts have no jurisdiction over the President unless Congress has impeached and convicted him of something first.

[@alexsegurasr3028]

They want to invent a system that they decide whose president not the people. They are so desperate to hold on to who controls the money they will go to any length to achieve that​@@danieldimarinomusic7754

[@user-tt9vx2bd5f]

they are trying to get rid of the constitution communism doesn't allow that

[@jamiemineer4879]

This will all backfire on these criminal politicians and prosecutors

[@jsasaunders9732]

Maybe the politicians will suffer but the prosecutors will do just fine. More power to the lawyers will be the end result.

[@davidmoore8327]

Wouldn’t hold my breath

[@user-dz2ej6kx9l]

All of this just highlights the power of psychology. Masterful manipulation of the masses. Some of these folks have studied this stuff their whole lives. We should applaud them! Just say it enough and they will believe it!

[@WeLuv9x5]

What about Obama and Holder’s Fast and Furious!?!

[@AWOLCPA]

Whataboutism...the mechanism by which conservatives avoid reality.

[@angusmckeogh659]

It was covered if you have listened to the hearing.

[@Red-vn4xq]

Well, it hasn't stopped them from doing it again. The drug cartel is nationwide All over the backwoods of East Coast

[@NoKingFreeRadical]

O'bummer's drone strike on a US citizen - who minimally had his due process rights violated never mind blown to bits.

[@chuckintexas]

​@@angusmckeogh659 COVERED , but *NOT* _yet_ PROSECUTED 👍 .

[@rebeccaburrows1038]

What about deadly drone strikes against American citizen without due process.

[@TheFdiaz220]

@@gerald8407 What about the Uvalde families?

[@JL-fx2cd]

That person represents a threat to America... and that is part of the presidents responsibilities... think. U think your tRUMP didn't drone strike "questionable" victims? Just listen..

[@JL-fx2cd]

​. Big foot sigjting?

[@psylintzu6036]

@@TheFdiaz220umm pretty sure they are being taken care of, keep up the good

[@DixT1]

Believe it or not, Obama's DOJ cleared him of being criminally charged.

[@user-gz4rk1gm4j]

I paid back my student loan! I should be reimbursed as my loan is now forgiven!

[@allamerican1248]

I couldn't afford college! I just want the money!

[@jamesferguson536]

If you didn't understand the terms of your loan, you probably shouldn't have gone to college.

[@user-dz2ej6kx9l]

I thought it was a slap in the face until I thought about ALL that money being spent on cars, houses, furniture, and those people being free to be contributors to society a lot faster. Marriage... babies, diapers, baby food. Way better for our economy. Why fight for big banks... especially when we bailed them out after they busted our economy with their greed. It's high time THEY get paid back for the pain they caused us. Poor guys lost all that interest. What a shame!!!

[@geralddubois7921]

Jack Smith is nauseating

[@user-dz2ej6kx9l]

Yeah.. especially for Trump! Heee heeee.. Couldn't happen to a nicer guy!

[@ryleighloughty3307]

"We want to design a system that is under the control of the DOJ." - Michael Dreeben. Heaven help us.

[@sandorebussolini]

The DOJ is under the president. So does that apply when the DOJ is a republican and the president is an outgoing Democrat, like Biden, who has committed many crimes but had their own crooked DOJ in Merritt Garland that only sees crimes in terms of Conservatives, but never does he see the crooked Democrat crimes. SO basically, GTFOOH with all of your witchhunts of the previous President who is the current frontrunner and you're trying to literally kill him, kill his finances, kill his freedom, create all kinds of workarounds to even get him indicted from a misdemeanor to a felony. These dirty filthy dishonest judges in NY make all of this undoable.

[@user-xx5sk2rs8g]

Communism! tribunals and police state ! stupid youth have no idea what they are fighting to institute THEY HAVE NO CLUE !

[@anthonyta3369]

That is BS.

[@anthonyta3369]

Too much politics so bs

[@nunyabeezwacks1408]

The truth comes out.

[@Shineon83]

Geez….WHERE in the h*ll do they get these DOJ attorneys from? One sounds like a chipmunk on speed--this one, sounds like a DEI super-Nerd 😂

[@gordie1233]

Hes def a beta. Hah

[@JoannaPresley]

Exactly! 😂

[@craigs.handle]

He really makes us Jews look Bad.

[@lolerie]

​@@craigs.handle😂😂😂😂😂😂

[@lindabordeaux4882]

Hahaha so true!

[@hansjas]

This attorney is a quack . Dei hire

[@Milestonemonger]

SCOTUS is too smart for these ambulance chasers.

[@revjudisorensen865]

DO YOU MEAN TRUMP OR BIDEN IT'S NOT CLEAR FROM YOU STATEMENT.

[@eddieroberts4666]

Sounds to me like he asking the court to make a law not uphold a law

[@dwaynejordan5898]

The court will define the parameters by which the lower court will hear the case....this is the function of the supreme court,,this primarily included a definition of private vs presidential acts..

[@Grizzly_Adams.]

Yeah

[@user-qx2tk4sq9b]

​@@dwaynejordan5898they will send it to the lower court to come up with a better argument. Then the bullshit they are trying to say in the Supreme Court today.

[@georgesotiropoulos8908]

Right on!

[@redpillcoach1855]

There is no law. The courts have the authority to impose procedures that could EASILY prevent this lawfare in the future.

[@margaretcrawford8316]

A president challenging an election is NOT a crime. Asking for a delay in certification SHOULD HAPPEN WHEN THERE ARE THE UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCES LIKE A PANDEMIC

[@Barbaralee1205]

And or shenanigans well document across turn key states. None of us are satisfied that stolen votes didn’t happen because politicians said they didn’t. The facts were never publicly examined.

[@GayleAllen-RINO]

FAKE ELECTORS AND 11,780 FAKE VOTERS IS ILLEGAL DONNIE DID THAT

[@sttyxx6270]

Anyone with a brain knows this. This is a power play

[@januarysson5633]

Nobody asked for a delay in certification because of the pandemic.

[@sttyxx6270]

@@januarysson5633 you are dense. The delay was to verify the votes as this was a very unusual election. The amount of mail in votes allowed was unprecedented.

[@user-kn9hi1zg5c]

It is reassuring to see so many thoughtful post, comments, and civil interactions surrounding this issue.

[@richardkersey8993]

“If you can’t dazzle them with your brilliance, baffle them with your bullshit.”

[@kaekeegan7032]

Please God give our country truth again....twisting lies to be truth is moral decay. Sad

[@youngstacker0493]

Yes! Please god please protect our lawful president Joseph Biden🙏🏻 In Jesus name bless the Biden’s and protect them from this Maga witch-hunt!! Please Jesus I’m praying for Joe!! @KaeKeegan7032 I completely agree with you!

[@christinea1161]

Well said!🙏

[@InfiniteLynn]

I know, I'm so sick of Republican lies.

[@eddiecaruth7704]

@@InfiniteLynn Whoever voted for joe bribem owes me gas money.

[@chuckintexas]

​@@InfiniteLynn - ... sick of trying to FIND Republican lies , so you have to twist and craft them _yourself_ .

[@brianbevard7815]

The more i hear her questioning the more respect i have for her. Smart and tough.

[@cavemandancer]

I just want a simple answer to a simple Question. Why do we have impeachment if their is no immunity?

[@user-dz2ej6kx9l]

If there is immunity, there's nothing to impeach him on! No act would be criminal!

[@tykemorris]

@@user-dz2ej6kx9l Impeachment is the exception to immunity. So his question makes sense but your answer doesn't. Nothing is criminal unless an impeachment conviction says it is.

[@user-dz2ej6kx9l]

@@tykemorris You are so funny! Talk around it all you want, but the law IS the constitution and Impeachment is based on the constitution. What don't you understand?

[@cavemandancer]

@@user-dz2ej6kx9l in the article of impeachment states the crimes that are impeachable. But the question you should ask is not what but where? Did you know that the president still gets paid? When Nixon was going to be charged and impeached for his crime, he resigned instead. The charges were dropped and he kept his pension. In fact Trump was impeached for the same thing Biden is doing now.

[@newtonfirefly3584]

@@user-dz2ej6kx9l You claims are certainly, explicitly False about Impeachment. See the explicit statement in USC, A II, S4: "The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors." Impeachment and Conviction is valid ONLY for violations stated. There are two explicit stages: Impeachment and Conviction In A I, is explicitly stated the House of Representatives initiated, determine Impeachment; The Senate performs the trial, thus determines the Conviction with the USSC Chief Justice presiding for US President. After an individual is no longer in the position, then any applicable prosecution in the appropriate court may be pursued. Clearly, explicitly, as heard within this recorded, partial discussion, question and answer of Justice Amy Coney-Barret of, with DOJ Special Jack Smith Lawyer Council, Michael Dreeben

[@lisarogers1392]

This attorney likes to hear himself talk and is unable to just get to the point and answer.

[@DKWalser]

The attorney's argument is if a President gets legal advice from the DOJ that an action is legal the President has immunity. There are two fundamental problems with this approach: First, if the matter is urgent, the President may not have time to seek legal advice. "That's a question of first impression, Mr. President. It'll take a review of court precedents and legislative history. I'll put my two best people on it. We should have an answer within a week. Two at the most." Only an attorney would think such an approach practical! Second, in some respects, this approach would elevate the opinion of the DOJ above the President's opinion. "If you don't do as I say, there's a good chance the next administration will prosecute you. After all, I'm a career DOJ employee and will still be here after you're gone." That's NOT how our system is supposed to work.

[@robertsmith2956]

ALL lawyers are under the court. You can't hire a lawyer to break the law, it doesn't matter if they work for the DOJ or not.

[@kenmclemore523]

Justice Kavanaugh's question on Obama's drone strike to get Bin Laden makes your point... KDM

[@mattschrader5047]

Any way you slice it, unelected officials who happen to be the people actually running Washington DC these days are trying to make all decisions go through them which 99.99% already do. They don't want the will of the people to matter anymore. It's that simple.

[@Hcfungfuikbgdhhh]

The DOJ only has authority which it has been granted by the executive. It is a subordinate organization to the constitutional executive authority which is the President. The idea that a subordinate org (OLC) of a subordinate org (DOJ) has authority that the President doesn’t have is absolutely nonsensical, since every authority the DOJ has it that which the President has delegated to it. Similarly, the idea that a President could mishandle classified information is nonsense since the entire classification system operates by the President’s authority.

[@dwaynejordan5898]

A president does not have total power,,hes no king and must abide by the law.....​@@Hcfungfuikbgdhhh

[@jasperhart1188]

Our constitution should be taught at every school and in every grade all the way to high school. And tax laws. And basic civil rights should be taught at ever school and in every grade all threw high school😊

[@keithwhite8109]

You are so right on the mark.👍

[@hankclausen8652]

Thank you Jasper! That needed to be said

[@hankclausen8652]

And Pledge Allegiance to the Flag!

[@sandrarufus8198]

The Declaration Of Independence n The Constitution, Is Taught In Schools, Etc!!!

[@user-xx5sk2rs8g]

yes! And personal responsibility should be taught to! because our youth think they should do whatever they want and every ones money is theirs!

[@lauragill9484]

Only protection necessary is from this Administration and the elitists..

[@thecharacterg]

It’s funny how they say motives, how they excuse Hillary for prosecution but not for trump

[@margaretcrawford8316]

Questioning an election during a pandemic, where every state created their own emergency voting protocol IS EXPECTED FOR AMERICANS

[@user-dz2ej6kx9l]

We wouldn't be here dealing with this idiocy if Trump would have relied on the facts! No facts sufficient to overturn an election. His own investigation turned up NOTHING! All legal remedies exhausted, what did he do? He put us here pondering the idea of putting someone above the law!

[@kencleg7721]

The democrats are the ones that changed the rules During Covid and it hasn’t changed. Guess what is not going to change

[@Former11BRAVO]

Illegal, unconstitutional voting protocols, bypassing state legislators' role in altering election law.

[@chipsterb4946]

In Maine, you can now list an “unconventional address” when registering to vote. This explicitly includes, but is not limited to, a culvert or a highway overpass. We no longer have “Election Day” or even “election week”. Now we have “in person absentee voting” for an entire month. (That is the Maine Secretary of State’s turn of phrase) If the true motivation was to accommodate peoples’ needs during the plandemic, why are these 🤬 voting provisions still in place?

[@user-qx2tk4sq9b]

​@@chipsterb4946we know why! You are correct how corrupt our government and systems have become.

[@johnharris6655]

If the lawyer was honest "Well Madame Justice, you see there are two sets of rules, one for Democrats and one for everyone else."

[@stephendunn968]

Amen to that! 💯

[@407j]

So is the President in charge or is the DOJ in charge? And if it is the DOJ who is in charge, why do we vote for the President and not the Attorney General?

[@yongsukmccarthy8571]

He is struggling really hard try to make it difficult for him to get lost himself,and Ms.Amy is breeze through ……………… she deserves that seat !!!!!!

[@andybeckett4340]

She should’ve asked Attorney Dreeben what’s an example of an “unauthorized presidential act”

[@dwaynejordan5898]

Those examples were stated in the indictment

[@wkahn1005]

Never forget OPERATION CROSSFIRE HURRICANE plotted in the Obama/Biden Oval Office against a Duly Elected President Trump. When it comes to Democrats CRIME Does PAY and Trump is in their WAY

[@andybeckett4340]

@@dwaynejordan5898 stated but it’s a matter of debate isn’t it?

[@perryrush6563]

Duh..... It's one he (the attorney) disagrees with

[@user-tn8ci6wg5k]

It's something the Deep State doesn't like, and it has to be committed by a Republican

[@skinzi55]

Think I speak for everyone when I say this case should be thrown out. I stand behind Trump ❤

[@shellywalker153]

If they can do it to him, they can do to anyone who disagrees. The Democrat tribal cult doesnt think it can ever happen to them.

[@NickYankee]

@@shellywalker153 you're in a cult.

[@NickYankee]

yeah, sure. But if the SCOTUS chooses not to hear it, the lower court decisions will stand. Meaning Trump has no immunity. It helps if you're informed.

[@timothybarber6827]

Best you stand behind Jesus his words never fail and want return void.

[@marlenebuls9535]

​@@NickYankee asinine comment

[@jag5316]

Guy sounds like the scientist at Total Recall trying to get Quaid to swallow the red pill.

[@Quantumanticz]

That last bit should have been called out as witch hunt. Basically “we’re coming after him regardless, we’ll submit this however we need to.” These people are evil.

[@aliciaogee3413]

Jack smith is nuts

[@user-dz2ej6kx9l]

Yeah, without him and many more like him, MANY MORE crimes would go unpunished....like PONZY schemes and corporate greed, just to name a couple. Without them, this country would be in a wholly worse place...NO DOUBT!

[@thewarrior9087]

That's why Garland picked him illegally outside the Federal statute. He is NOT a sitting Federal Prosecutor. That alone should kick all his cases. -theWarrior

[@richardobryan8041]

REACHHHHIIINNGG, just can't quite stretch far enough..... F...JS AND FJB

[@perryrush6563]

LGB

[@sirrloin]

SCOTUS needs to stop allowing DAs and prosecutors to do things in "good faith" or the "right thing" because they'll always abuse it.

[@Lana-ej1fq]

We are living in a corrupt America

[@Prestonpittman1955]

This guy cannot ever be allowed to hold an official administrative position! 🤪👍🇺🇸

[@revjudisorensen865]

THAT'S BS !!!!!!!!!!!!

[@allendean9807]

Equal Justice Under The Law It’s on the front door, people. Do your jobs. This case is ridiculous

[@RJTruthBTold]

Everything is twisted facts. The subject matter is the only truth. Trump was still speaking when people went into the White House. He said ", Let's march peacefully" Big reason to indict him.

[@33greenleaf]

@@RJTruthBToldpeople went to the White House?

[@jerrybobteasdale]

I admit to having listened while doing something else. However, it sure sounded like they were arguing about making new law at the Supreme Court. That is not the proper function of the Supreme Court.

[@Green-cm4eb]

The FBI crimes should be brought to light before the Supreme Court.

[@joebender557]

What about aiding and abetting illegal aliens in, Who commit crimes.

[@marilynbarriger7726]

Clinton,Biden,etc?

[@user-dz2ej6kx9l]

Not even worth responding to. Sorry

[@gr33kb0i]

That’s dumb

[@danieldevault716]

Congress decides if President committed a felony through impeachment and sentencing.

[@kencleg7721]

They tried that and failed

[@autohrap5884]

@@kencleg7721so what are we doing?

[@untilvalhalla7854]

Thank you.

[@Lizzie1968]

On top of that: they impeached him TWICE!, and failed TWICE! Because they are sore losers they thought to give it a THIRD go. Waste of time and taxpayers money. If they had to pay for these lawsuits out of their own pockets they would not bring these frivalous suits

[@ConstitutionalAmerican]

What is the sentence that Congress can impose on an impeached US President?

[@joshdubovsky5409]

Presidential prosecutions should be limited to the federal government.

[@jimmywilliams9824]

Our schools have failed us for many years , this is insane

[@user-dz2ej6kx9l]

I'd say the parents have failed society for expecting someone else to raise their kids. Really, to be fair, it was corporate GREED that got us here, pushing women's lib which increased the labor pool, which allowed for lower wages and eventually forcing the need for 2 incomes to raise a family. Schools, daycare centers, babysitters, child services, adoption agencies, etc. now raise our kids. Don't get me wrong! I'm all for women and their freedom to do whatever makes them happy, but I will say I think she will ALWAYS want to take care of her children and a man will ALWAYS want to take care of his family. But I DON'T think we want Schools, daycare centers, babysitters, child services, adoption agencies, etc to do it for us. So, how do we get out of this MESS????

[@user-pg7iq8zd5u]

Why can't we find better lawyers...the Supreme court(members) are bored with your arguments!!

[@gregorymikula4249]

Why do these anti-Trump DOJ lawyers sound so lithspy?

[@user-tn8ci6wg5k]

Transformers

[@amysimpson646]

It's a side effect of kissing too many rear ends.

[@emedel5772]

It's from always speaking out of both sides of their mouths.

[@user-dz2ej6kx9l]

We wouldn't be here dealing with this idiocy if Trump would have relied on the facts! No facts sufficient to overturn an election. His own investigation turned up NOTHING! All legal remedies exhausted, what did he do? He put us here pondering the idea of putting someone above the law!

[@OneVoiceMore]

Diversssssssity hire.

[@davealmighty9638]

How is it that federal officers, federal judges, and prosecutors get absolute immunity, but the president does not?

[@nanofoods]

The Constitution and Bill of Rights must be upheld. Therefore, many from past administration should all be in prison.

[@bessarion1771]

If nobody is above the law, nobody is BELOW the law.

[@Aaron-fl2iv]

Well, that's what no one being above the law is implying......that everyone is under the law.

[@bessarion1771]

@@Aaron-fl2iv let me rephrase - Biden and Clinton should be rotting in jail now if Jack Smith's logic was applied equally to all presidents... Obomba too.

[@kennethcheesbrough6855]

But I sure seams like every politicians breaks the laws both both constantutional and federal and state laws. And when they are called out on it , they have ten of them lieing for them and use immunity as a defence or they say that your racist or being political.

[@Calbeck]

A godawful lot of this lawyer's arguments seem to be based entirely on mindreading and interpretations of what someone "meant to do" instead of "what actually happened". Are they going to call the ghost of Jeanne Dixon to testify at this point?

[@vjbhatia77]

Exactly! They’ve already put bad motives on the man they hate so any actions that he does must be bad intent according to these government lawyers. It’s always a rigged system.

[@kinngrimm]

I was thinking something similarly, like they seem to imply at times that presidents could do no harm, do no crime, but if they do it would be on behalf of the nation and never in self interest. Doesn't matter which partys president is in charge, if you give them blanket immunity, eventually you will get someone who will abuse that. They already do abuse their pwoers at times even without immunity, with it they would be more free to act more radically as they would no longer be bound by laws at all.

[@gund89123]

Supreme Court is not determining if Trump broke the law. They are determining if Trump has immunity.

[@joewreckingballbiden9156]

@@kinngrimm Biden is abusing his now with clear election interference.

[@twiztid6977420]

​@@kinngrimm Like drone striking American citizens?

[@MrEarnxtracash]

if Diplomats have diplomatic immunity from crimes in other countries, how would a president not have the same immunity or even more in their own country?

[@keithmccabe4040]

Renagle isn't a word but finagle is and that's what he's doing. Smith's team is a disgrace.

[@walthoward68]

This attorney ‘schooling’ the SC is hilarious. He’s trying to rewrite the Constitution.

[@user-dz2ej6kx9l]

SCOTUS don't get it! Immunity means ICE in CONGRESS AND SCOTUS! There's no immunity outside civil liability....PERIOD!

[@thepatriot3209]

The lawyer's point is that the president is not immune from criminal prosecution (3:43), because the Constitution prescribes that in such matters the decision can only be taken by a jury, and that there is no article in the Constitution conferring immunity to the President. Hilarious, indeed!

[@throwitatthewall6289]

No, constitution gives that duty to congress

[@fungibleunit4477]

@@throwitatthewall6289 Moscow Mitch disagreed.

[@deegomez4098]

​@@fungibleunit4477Moscow. Itch is compromised and so happy he is not returning to leadership position

[@roginutah]

The assumption of someone else's motive is a slippery thing.

[@dwaynejordan5898]

It can be but sometimes its quite clear...and in this case Trumps motive was very clear,,he wanted the certification of Biden stopped and he had numerous illegal plans to do so.

[@robertmcdonaldoh]

Thanks Forbes team 👍🏻

[@jonfoss3437]

Peacefully and patrioticly is pretty clear!!!!

[@jamesbucholtz7541]

I was a VP at three different companies. Legal advice does not have to be followed, just as all advice is just what it sounds like, nothing more than an opinion. Lawyers are proven wrong every damn day. On occasion I refused to follow the advice of in-house lawyers who, if given the chance, would hand cuff every executive. I was always proven correct!!!!!

[@mikedavis4851]

Desantis,and Abbot.😅

[@TexasPoker40]

Being VP of several mini marts really doesn’t qualify you to chime in, let the adults handle this one.

[@user-dz2ej6kx9l]

Yeah, but just because you want it to be so, doesn't make it so. If 19 out of 20 are telling you one thing and one is telling you what you want to be so, THAT doesn't make it so! You'd better back up and re-think things!

[@user-qx2tk4sq9b]

​@@TexasPoker40that's funny because what he said is true. We all have opinions and by your standards your comments are irrelevant.

[@RickClifton]

@@user-qx2tk4sq9b the point is, @jamesbucholtz7541 made a tautological statement that really says nothing that anyone with half a brain wouldn't understand. That's why they call it "advice". OTOH, I seriously doubt there were any lawyers in his organization "who, if given the chance, would hand cuff every executive." That, and his last sentence are totally gratuitous statements..

[@Darronsanderson]

"It's not about how hard you hit. It's about how hard you can get hit and keep moving forward. How much you can take and keep moving forward"- Rocky

[@aaronjohnston1584]

She's not ACB. She's Justice Barrett.

[@khemkaslehrling3840]

If ensuring our highest level national election is secure, fair, and valid is not a presidential (rather than personal) act, then what is?

[@smokymtnlady3856]

I FINALLY figured it out! Dreedons voice reminds me of Squiggy from Laverne and Shirley!! 😂

[@therealnynetynyne360]

YOu aren't wrong, now I feel old for knowing who squiggly was lol

[@JoannaPresley]

Haha he does!

[@lisarogers1392]

Incredibly had to listen to

[@yernotthebossofme1062]

⚡️🤣🤣🤣👍

[@margaretcrawford8316]

How is questioning an election a private act?

[@mikedavis4851]

When you send idiots to storm capitol,sceam to set up fake electors in in states,to take over another branch of government DOJ to send letters to states to over through election,down load information from voting machines,fake audits by Trumps cyber ninjas,members of Congress spewing lies on fake fox consertade effort .😮

[@dwaynejordan5898]

Organising alternate slate of electors is a crime...asking the VP to not certify an election is a crime..the president has no role in certification

[@Grizzly_Adams.]

There's millions of people questioning every election. How are we official?

[@richardbryanesq]

More lies

[@jameswestberg6549]

It is for you and me, its not for a president.

[@Burl900]

Justice ACB is a brilliant legal mind.

[@MsVrv]

She's an actress , played the part of Amanda Knox

[@gusvonstupen1897]

This lawyer is making Trumps case for him.

[@noraferguson5658]

The President needs DOJ permission? So, the DOJ runs the country or lawyers run the country?! No, no, no

[@ToniPfau]

That attorney should lose this case just on the way he talks. I think that's a grown man who's talking like a Valley girl in front of the Supreme court. Weird.

[@Rogers319]

I’ve listened to a good portion of all of these arguments and what this lawyers, basic argument, boils down to is “just trust the government and the department of justice to not do anything illegal”. 😂

[@SGCXD]

Is that Jack Smith responding to ACB? Cuz that guy sounds like a fuckin weirdo 😂

[@J42494]

The President must have immunity or every president will be prosecuted every time a change administration takes place.

[@januarysson5633]

Actually only when a Democrat takes over from a Republican.

[@thats_suber]

This is for actions the president takes while in office, not out of office.

[@bethnewman4722]

No on President Trump!

[@dutchdna]

Not every president. Crooked presidents. Like Trump. Actually the first in 200+ years.

[@user-dz2ej6kx9l]

SCOTUS don't get it! Immunity means ICE in CONGRESS AND SCOTUS! There's no immunity outside civil liability....PERIOD!

[@johnwhitehurst474]

Judge let me translate it into clear text! " We be from the Government, and we are here to help you" We need a panel of 20 judges one from each state to be able to remove this kind of person form any federal or at state positions.

[@musicmatty67]

This attorney for the justice department is completely lost in his arguments and he knows it. The justice department is opening a can of worms that they should not play with. Tamper with the system that’s in place and then it leaves complete discretion to each justice department with every new administration to move forward with criminal prosecution towards a president that otherwise should be settled by the mechanism of impeachment.

[@petercristo992]

Justice Coney-Barrett is pretty good. 🇺🇲

[@therealkRon1k]

probably the smartest of the 9

[@DarinW-gx3mm]

@@therealkRon1k she’s smart, but I wouldn’t say she’s smarter of the bunch.

[@dustinnunez5077]

@@therealkRon1k no that’s justice Clarence Thomas

[@Cmez872]

@@dustinnunez5077 🤣🤣🤣

[@januarysson5633]

She’s no Alito or Gorsuch.

[@paulblade6064]

Why would anyone want to be President if they can be brought up on charges when their Presidency ends? This is not a good idea. A President cannot have these kind of restraints.

[@ninamartinez5171]

That's part of the plan Democrats have lost their minds.

[@LesterBrunt]

Just don’t commit the crime if you don’t want to do the time.

[@theredscourge]

​@@LesterBrunt Riiiight, because Trump just casually committed 80+ "crimes", one for each lawsuit, like the "world's first unarmed insurrection" where he told the people to go home in peace and then got banned from Twitter because they didn't quite like the way in which he said it, or the "sexual assault" that there's no evidence for that NY state had to change the law in order to be able to try and charge him with, or the Mar-A-Lago "crime" that every property developer in the history of the US would also be "guilty" of if he is, and for some reason all these trials have to be done in a way where the judge declares them guilty, and he only ever sees a jury for the process of deciding what the punishment will be. THAT all sounds super fair and reasonable!

[@theredscourge]

@@LesterBrunt You don't honestly expect us to believe that Trump did 90+ crimes and that the fact that they go back up to 40 years and are all being prosecuted in an election year is a complete coincidence, do you? Where's the charges against the Clinton and Biden families? Bill and Joe's accusers didn't wait 40 years to come out of the woodwork and accuse them of things, they came out with it immediately and the legal system still ignores them to this day.

[@theredscourge]

@@LesterBrunt Tell that to the people who were offended over "Lock her up!"

[@jesiarjuna8495]

There is no dept. of justice It’s the dept. of injustice

[@spencercross3867]

What duty permitted Operation Fast And Furious Furious?

[@Rollin.the.Wild.West.c14]

“It” should have just said “I have major tds and I feel he is guilty.

[@leeames9063]

Whats wrong with The Daily Show? A lot of people watch that show.

[@bradsmith9526]

This is truly ..

[@jackreynolds6066]

After listening to this for about 12 minutes, I realize that we need less lawyers...

[@user-pj1lr5vt7z]

In Federalist #57 Madison argued that the legislature “can make no law which will not have its full operation on themselves and their friends as well as the great mass of society. This has always been deemed one of the strongest bonds by which human policy can connect the rulers and the people together. It creates that communion of interest and sympathy of sentiment of which few governments have furnished examples, but without which every government degenerates into tyranny. “

[@purplestareye]

Congress has been exempting themselves from the laws they have passed since before I've been born...NO ONE CHALLENGED THEM!

[@newtonfirefly3584]

@@purplestareye Basically correct. The US Congress has been passing illegal, unlawful, Unconstitutional Laws since at least 1840 [first Law have seen so far; - about Pharmacopoeia - which they claimed are permitted within ]their explicit Jurisdiction within Commerce between US and other countries, also between States; A I, S 8: "The Congress shall have Power ..." "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;" They lack other Power to Regulate. The last challenge was by Plaintiffs in 1934, post 21A repeal of 18A "Alcohol [Beverage] Prohibition" which amended the USC, thus allowed Congress to Legislate within the Prohibition, against the previously legally passed "Alcohol [Beverage] Prohibition Act"; The USSC decided, ruled properly, that the Congress Authority, Power, Jurisdiction and been removed by 21A, 18A repeal, thus their Authority, Power, Jurisdiction repealed, removed, such their Legislation was deemed Unconstitutional, Null & Void. When will You or other citizens initiated, implement their 1A Rights with legal petition the Government for redress of their grievances, objection, opposition, challenge in court ?! No branch of the government within the US Federal, State, County, City, Locale, has or will ever relinquish their claimed Authority, Power, Jurisdiction, certainly via their willingness, desire nor admit, agree; they must be legally sued within the appropriate US Federal, Supreme, State, County, City, Local court to remove their illegal, unlawful, Unconstitutional Legislation, Orders, Decrees, Mandates, etc., which are certainly outside of their Authority, Power, Jurisdiction along with those which directly violate the Rights & Freedoms within 1-10A, 14A, etc. Will You take up this challenge as the other Plaintiffs in 1934, 2020-4 ?! All The Best, Sincerely

[@user-dz2ej6kx9l]

I think the founding fathers gave us WAY Tooooo much credit in thinking we would have the common sense about this! You gotta hold our hands. We can't do it on our own!

[@Penelopesyoutube]

Lol it's not that hard. We don't need these unelected people

[@blueyedevil3479]

That’s the problem… decades ago, people stopped doing shit for themselves and waited for others to do it for them

[@allendean9807]

The founding fathers did it right; the office of the president was mainly a ceremonial duty. He was the head of state, not a monarch. Ever since Adams, the power of the executive branch has been expanded to what we have today…

[@user-xx5sk2rs8g]

@@allendean9807 No sorry the president is the executive branch the president is commander and chief! when was the presidency ever ceremonial .NEVER.. that's BS! the problem is people like you think we should have a thousand non elected people running the show that's your idea of socialism and is exactly why our country is falling NOW!

[@PISQUEFrancis]

@@blueyedevil3479 Even the revolutionary War, people were very disinclined to split from England ... the snake(Revolution), began at the head, then spread to the typical citizens .... Citizens fought the battles, but those like the Founding Fathers, started the ball rolling and sought the funding and allies with other countries ...

[@blackops.bowhunter559]

Jack smith's voice explains it all.

[@SumDumGy]

It’s so cute that Forbes thinks this qualifies as “grilling.” She appeared to be agreeing with everything he said.

[@insufferableconceit]

They got you to click

[@SumDumGy]

@@insufferableconceit …and got me to dislike. They’ve also managed to get me to watch less of their content over time. Clickbait titles and redundant video clips get old fast.

[@SeekingTruthAnd]

Supreme Court should not waste time and go directly to the definition of POTUS's job description.

[@newtonfirefly3584]

The extremely limited, restricted Power, Authority, Jurisdiction of the US President is explicitly stated, defined in US C A II, S2 + Additional Responsibilities in S 3. there are NONE Else nor additional "Job description". The issues are actually not specific with the President, rather are within the Rights & Freedoms within 1A for All Citizens within 1A, "petition of the Government for redress of grievances" not only by the US President, VP, any member of Congress, Department Agency, Judge within all areas and level of the US government, also every US citizen; along with "Freedom of Speech", "exercise of Religion", "peaceably to assemble". Simple. Period. The Federal Government, US President, VP, Executive Branch, Congress, Legislative Branch, Judicial Branch have NO Authority, Power, Jurisdiction within any elections which occur within each State, and only the proper implementation, execution of the proper, valid, Election of the US President, VP according to the explicit, precise, detailed, process stated in US C A II, S1 + 12 A. Simple Period. [via EC Elector [determined by each State Legislature (NOT public voting, ballots - though could be performed, used by each State Legislature within their determination - not precluded, prohibited nor defined means of determination)] cast, signed, certified, sealed, sent ballots All The Best. Sincerely

[@dougmoore4653]

@@newtonfirefly3584 - secondary electors are legal and have been done before by both parties

[@newtonfirefly3584]

@@dougmoore4653 doug what are You attempting to claim about trhe existence of "secondary electors: [do not exist within the US Constitution and any basis from any political parities" ?! Actually by attempting claim anything form "political parties" proves the claims, ideas are certainly False, Pretense, Distortions, Nonsense, Unconstitutional, illegal, unlawful as their massive Legislation, False portrayals with "National Presidential Elections" along with Your person ignorance, inDOCtrination, Propaganda as the masses of "Sheepeople"/"Sheeple" 😞

[@redpillcoach1855]

Establish procedural rules for the lower courts so they are consistent with Constitutional provisions like Equal Protection and Due Process is in the description.

[@newtonfirefly3584]

@@redpillcoach1855 Clearly You lack the actual Authority, Power of the Judicial Branch, thus the Supreme Court !! 😞 They are limited to Judge from within the existing Laws,n ot interpret, nor establish procedures; the later is defined by the Laws, Legislation

[@Penelopesyoutube]

Who is the little guy talking. These people think they're super smart

[@treyriver5676]

He probably is... that does not make him right.

[@christopherwade1101]

Merrick should be roundly reprimanded and Special Council Jack Smith should be held over in contempt of court, for frivolous litigation and malicious prosecution. He should face ethics charges, be summarily removed as special council. What an embarrassment to the SCOTUS to have such venal legal malpractice brought before it.

[@user-cw9sr9ks8s]

Where is the crime he hasn't been found quilty of court law

[@stephenkedge6805]

Because the corrupt AF legal system is creating endless delay.

[@EmilyBlunt-rr2jd]

Exactly and SCOTUS has been infiltrated with antiAmerican actvists appointed by the OBama and Obiden camp, there is no reason whatsoever to have this hearing at all, President Trump has not committed any crime contrary to Obama weaponizing CIA,NSA, IRS, ICE, DOJ FISA, CDC, FDA, his healthcare with the abusive fraudulent Obamacare!

[@DAVIDMAINORD]

KGB, NO WONDER WE HAVE BECOM A LAGHING STOCK. UNDER O-BIDEN

[@AvalonDreamz]

@@stephenkedge6805 He won't be found guilty because there is no crime. This is election interference.

[@Carlisle73]

Depends on which crime you're referring to. He's been found guilty in the E-Jean Carrol case. However, The problem is they won't let the court of law proceed to decide if he was guilty in some of these trials because of the very immunity case being argued.

[@kavalerdivacom]

The answer is simple, the President is "above the law" while he is President. It can be no other way. If he does something untoward while President there is nothing we can do about it except use it as a basis to kick him out (impeach and convict). Then he is free to live his life as is. That is the best for the country.

[@Grizzly_Adams.]

Actually if he's impeached and convicted, he can be convicted in court too. He can't be found innocent in the Senate then indicted too

[@sandrarufus8198]

This Is NOT Russia, This Is AMERICA!! NO Occupant Of The OVAL Is There To COMMIT CRIMES And Expect NO CONSEQUENCES!!! HOW RIDICULOUS STUPID FOR The President Or Anyone TO SAID OTHERWISE!!! YOU WANT NO ACCOUNTABILITY, RUN FOR OFFICE IN RUSSIA!!!!

[@user-qx2tk4sq9b]

​@@Grizzly_Adams.wrong. He made the correct statement. Impeach or vote them out. The bullshit we are witnessing now is exactly why presidents have immunity. biden out making a fool of himself. And Trump is in court for frivolous allegations.

[@kapip6969]

To impeach is to bring that immunity into question, senate then may choose to convict [essentially a trial] or not. if not (this is the case for trump) then he is immune.

[@blainehadlock5599]

Send Michael Dreeben home. ☑