The left has their unisex panties in a bunch because SCOTUS voted 9-0 that a state doesn’t have the power to remove a candidate from the ballot. The decision was based upon the 14th Amendment, Section 3 of which the left claims granted states the authority to bar a person (in this case, Trump) from running for office if they were involved in an insurrection.

Section 3: No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any state legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any state, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

However, SCOTUS denied this claim, saying that Section 5 of the same Amendment vests that power solely in the Congress.

Section 5: The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

I am not going to go into too many specifics of this case, because I don’t really want to get into this case. Instead, I want to talk about the next Trump case, explain how SCOTUS is going to rule in Trump’s favor, then explain why it won’t matter. The above points matter in the upcoming case, and I will explain why.

The case involves the actions taken by Trump while he was contesting the results of the 2020 election. He is facing criminal prosecution for those actions which have resulted in 91 criminal charges spread among four cases. Trump is arguing that he has immunity for these actions because they were taken in furtherance of his official duties. I believe that he is correct for the following reasons:

Civil Immunity

After Nixon left the White House, he was sued for actions that he had taken while he was President. Nixon argued that a president cannot be sued for official actions taken while he is in office. The case is Nixon v. Fitzgerald, and it clearly establishes that Presidents have immunity from civil liability for acts taken while executing their official duties, even if they are sued for those acts after leaving office.

Criminal Immunity

The left counters that this doesn’t apply to criminal immunity. I think that they are wrong, because of the Federalist papers, debates at the Constitutional Convention, and the early history of constitutional interpretation demonstrate an assumption of absolute Presidential immunity. One of our founding fathers (Gouverneur Morris1– the youngest signed of the Articles of Confederation- see below)argued that the President can do no criminal act without accomplices who may be punished. In the event that the President were to be re-elected, that will be sufficient proof of his innocence. I assume that the unlawful act Morris referred to was taken as an official duty. I also assume that pulling out a handgun and shooting the first lady, accepting bribes, and the like would not be covered by immunity because they were likely not official acts. Note that actions taken while executing official duties need not be lawful, as long as they are official acts. The remedy here for the punishment of unlawful, official acts is impeachment and elections. To do otherwise would mean that Presidents would need to clear every decision and act through White House legal counsel, making the President a slave to his attorneys.

To me, this is important because it’s the reason why Obama can’t be prosecuted for assassinations of American citizens that were carried out on his orders. The fact remains that Obama, through his orders, committed murder of an American citizen, but since he did so in furtherance of his official duties, the only remedy available to the US is impeachment or subsequent elections. It has to be this way, or Truman could very well have been executed for the bombing of Dresden or Hiroshima as a war criminal.

The reason for this, is that the Executive is the only branch of government that consists of a single person. Congress has two houses, Constitutionally made up of at least 50 Senators and 50 Representatives, and the Supreme court, made up of multiple Justices. The Executive is the only branch with one member, meaning that it is the only one who needs criminal immunity for actions taken in official duties.

Official Duties

So the question remains, were the acts that Trump took to dispute the veracity and accuracy of the election official acts? I would say yes, they are. There are numerous laws about elections and how they are to be carried out. Enforcing those laws is the responsibility of the Executive and well within the purview of the Chief Executive.

Now this doesn’t mean that Trump is above the law. He was impeached for those actions less than a week after the end of his term, but the Senate failed to convict. Trump was indicted on August 1, 2023, for the conduct for which he was impeached, which is what this entire case is built upon. It’s important to note that his opponent in the election, who happens to be the current President, waited three years to file the indictment, an obvious attempt at election tampering.

The question for SCOTUS is this: “Whether and if so to what extent does a former President enjoy presidential immunity from criminal prosecution for conduct alleged to involve official acts during his tenure in office.” For the above reasons, I believe that SCOTUS has no choice but to vote in support of Presidential Immunity, or else it endangers the entire concept of the peaceful transition of power, meaning that Trump’s current criminal cases will disappear, at least at the Federal level.

So What Then?

With all of this being said, the left simply won’t allow Trump to return to the Oval Office. The Federal Bureaucrats simply can’t allow it, or he will begin swinging the metaphorical budget slashing machete. Should Trump regain the Presidency, a lot of Federal careers will come to an end- perhaps even entire departments.

The left simply HATES Trump, and will see him dead before he is permitted back into the White House. They can’t let Trump ruin their communist takeover.

For those reasons, expect violence when lawfare doesn’t work. Perhaps Trump will even be assassinated. I don’t think that they are desperate enough to take him out like Sadat was killed, but I don’t see Trump ever again being President.

1Gouverneur Morris was an important figure in the First Continental Congress. He cast the deciding vote against Court Martial for George Washington, which would have removed him from command of the Army, which would mean that he would not have been our First President. The other thing is that he argued that the poor would sell their votes to the rich and that voting should be restricted to property owners.


TLF · March 5, 2024 at 5:38 am

I expect they’ll allow the prosecution of Trump to proceed: Roberts is most definitely a part of the DC establishment himself and he has been very willing to bend as much as needed to arrive at a desired outcome. If he breaks with the three liberals, only Barrett or Kavenaugh (or both) need to wobble to make a majority.

Dirty Dingus McGee · March 5, 2024 at 6:25 am

Will Trump win in court? Eventually yes. Will he win in the court of public opinion? Already has, at least among those with an IQ above room temperature. Will he win in the election? Possible, but less than 50% chance given the past record of vote fraud. Were he to actually make it to the office of president will he be able to “clean house”? Zero chance. The rot is too deep, the power too entrenched.

I think the worst thing the globalist’s could do is “take out” Trump pre-election. The pot is already simmering, that would tip it to full boil for many. That would show to some (many?) that there is no way out so all bets are off and it’s now open season with no bag limit. The next 12 months are going to be “interesting” to say the least. “Interesting” like this country hasn’t seen in 160 years. I suspect those that depend on the government for their finances, be they employees of the bureaucracy, SS recipients, welfare recipients, will find themselves short of funds.The last group will include the millions of recent “asylum seekers” that are here only to keep the globalist’s employed.

If you don’t already have plans in place for the coming collapse, it’s likely too late. Time is tight to stock up on bullets and beans, and a secure place to store them.

    oldvet50 · March 5, 2024 at 6:54 am

    I don’t think he will win in the court of public opinion if what you say is true. Do you really think the majority of Americans today have an IQ above room temperature? Just look at what television shows are successful today compared to what was offered 50 years ago.

      Dirty Dingus McGee · March 5, 2024 at 7:35 am

      I honestly have no idea whats on tv these days. I haven’t watched tv, other than what might be on at a pub (usually sports of some form) in probably 15 years. I just base that observation on what I see out in real life, other than in the occupied territories (city’s). And even in those areas there are more than a few who are coming to the realization that things are going sideways. Fast. Thats why I think there is a chance, albeit slim, that he could win the election. Not that that will help, as I said the rot is too deep to change anything at this point.

oldvet50 · March 5, 2024 at 6:43 am

I would argue that the President cannot be tried for any crime, official or not, except through impeachment and only impeachment. Anyone who believes otherwise believes that foreign diplomats (and their families) have more protection than our own President. All that can happen to a diplomat is expulsion from our country and perhaps their own country will prosecute them.

    Divemedic · March 5, 2024 at 7:01 am

    The left is trying to make the case that the bar on criminal trials for a President only applies when he is actually in office, and once he is no longer the sitting President, they are free to go back and charge him for the things he did.

      Dirty Dingus McGee · March 5, 2024 at 7:39 am

      Only until a democrat faces that type of prosecution. Then, and only then, does immunity become the order of the day.

SiG · March 5, 2024 at 8:27 am

I doubt that any legal decision is going to stop the attacks on Trump or anyone/anything. They’ll go ahead and keep railroading/lynching no matter what.

Why? Simple example: the supreme court told Joe, “you can’t ‘forgive’ student loans,” so he goes ahead and does it anyway.

Defying the judicial branch is pretty much saying, “I command the military. How many troops do you control?” It’s throwing out one of the key concepts of our Republic – balance of powers. If they say it’s unconstitutional, the president can’t do it. The president can’t say, “make me stop.”

    Divemedic · March 5, 2024 at 8:43 am

    Which is the reason why we have the Second Amendment, the ultimate balance of power.

      McChuck · March 6, 2024 at 11:33 am

      Re: 2A
      Tools only work when you use them.

        Divemedic · March 6, 2024 at 3:44 pm

        Whenever someone tells me this, I always ask this:

        If you think it’s time for 2A remedies, then why aren’t YOU out there stacking bodies, instead of goading others to do so on the Internet? There are a few possible answers as to why this isn’t happening:

        1 You are a Fed or some other leftist who is trying to get the people on here to say something criminal.
        2 You are all talk and aren’t going to do anything, but are perfectly willing to let others do it for you.
        3 All of the above.

        I am running this blog, which isn’t as useless as it seems. Bringing others to our side, and warning others of what is coming is an important function. Ask Paul Revere.
        It isn’t without risk. Just a short time ago, I had someone go to some lengths to discover my address and was making threats. I even received postcards at my house, I am assuming as a message that they knew where I lived.
        Go running off too early with some half assed plan, and you will wind up in a SuperMax or some other solitary hellhole like the J6 guys, or you will get a lethal injection.
        Patience is the key here.

    oldvet50 · March 5, 2024 at 2:48 pm

    I know there is supposed to be a balance of powers, but everyone believes the Judicial Branch controls everything. They evidently ARE supreme above the Legislative and Executive. If a law is passed and someone disagrees with that law as being against the USC, (like whether the 2nd applies to ALL firearms) the Justices will be the final arbiters of whether it is legal…..and no one questions it again. I personally do not believe the Justices are infallible nor are they unbiased. To your point about FJB and the military, he DID say you’d need nukes and fighter aircraft to stand up to him – I heard him say it. C’mon man.

      Divemedic · March 5, 2024 at 4:18 pm

      You can thank the Marshall court for that. However, if Congress doesn’t like what the court ruled, they can always impeach justices, or simply refuse to fund the court’s budget.

SoCoRuss · March 5, 2024 at 1:36 pm

My questions is, is this another in a long line of SCOTUS decisions that’s done to just make them look reasonable then the next decisions that follows and will fuck us all is what the globalist really want?
There have been multiple decisions made by this group to make them look like they actually GAF about the constitutional law then the next decision, the one that really counts for the globo homos, is pure globalist bullshit (read “Pedo island Roberts” many defenses of pure illegal poliical actions)!!!

SoCoRuss · March 5, 2024 at 3:17 pm

I was reading more on the SCOTUS wording of their decision and it hit me. The globalist don’t have to steal the president election now. If they just turn the house to commie also, they then can by consent of the SCOTUS decision. Invoke the14th on Trump……

    Divemedic · March 5, 2024 at 4:18 pm

    They can’t do it by naming him, because that would be a Bill of Attainder.

BCE · March 5, 2024 at 11:00 pm

They’re already lining up a ‘fall guy/country’ (Iran) for payback for the Soleimani Assassination.

Funny point: The -exact- spot that Hellfire took him out was a spot I went past hundreds of times on my booze-runs to BIAP to the Duty Free…

Elrod · March 6, 2024 at 8:28 am

It’s going to get increasingly “difficult” the closer we get to the November election. I’m now starting to seriously doubt that we will actually make it to Nov 05; if the Left perceives that they will lose, regardless of whatever shenanigans they might pull, they will have to prevent the election from occuring. Exactly how they do that I dunno, but I’d wager whatever means they choose won’t be even slightly pleasant.

Neither will the response.

Really, really, really wish it were not so, but “wishes” ain’t a viable survival plan.

Comments are closed.