General Discussion

ToxMarz

(2,306 posts) Thu Mar 27, 2025, 05:37 PM Thursday

About the Trumps "absolute immunity from criminal prosecution" for official acts.

Trump and his administration are also requred to keep and maintain all records, which are ultimatley the property of the people. Wouldn't any official acts he expects immunity for then have to have all the records associated with it or it wouldn't be considered an official act. No offical record, then it officially didn't happen. If the records are purposely not being kept, then it should be de facto assumed he did not intend it to be an official act which would require record keeping. I don't see he gets to have it both ways.

2 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

About the Trumps "absolute immunity from criminal prosecution" for official acts. (Original Post) ToxMarz Thursday OP

The doj won't prosecute Donnie, so it doesn't really matter. unblock Thursday #1

Logically, a crime against the Constitution cannot be an official act C_U_L8R Thursday #2

unblock

(54,868 posts)

1. The doj won't prosecute Donnie, so it doesn't really matter.

Reply to ToxMarz (Original post)

Thu Mar 27, 2025, 05:43 PM

Thursday

Besides, it was really just a promise to let Donnie off the hook, mostly by making things up as needed to do so.

C_U_L8R

(46,821 posts)

2. Logically, a crime against the Constitution cannot be an official act

Reply to ToxMarz (Original post)

Thu Mar 27, 2025, 05:51 PM

Thursday

Nor breaking his oath to uphold it. Otherwise you end up in a Gordian knot of what the definition of is... is. Screw that. If Trump breaks the laws of our land, he should pay the price.

Reply to this discussion