Thread: S.C. during oral arguments ignored the proper venue, to try a President for crimes.

.
Yesterday, 4/25/2024, our Supreme Court, when hearing oral arguments concerning Trump and presidential immunity, they totally dropped the ball in ferreting out the constitutionally authorized venue to try a President for an alleged crime.


The truth is, our Constitution provides for the House to allege a crime, and the Senate is vested with the power to convene a trial to determine if that crime has actually occurred. If the Senate finds a crime has been committed, then the president can be prosecuted for that crime in a public venue, probably initiated by the United States Attorney General.


Generally speaking, in the case of a president committing a crime, the House and Senate act in a manner similar to that of a Grand Jury.


There is no other venue, other than Congress, mentioned in the Constitution to deal with a President who violates the law, and since the Constitution does provide that venue, it appears that is the proper venue to deal with a president who acts criminally while in office.


Why was the impeachment process added to our Constitution? One reliable source answering that question is Mason:


"Mason argued to his fellow delegates that Hastings was accused of abuses of power, not treason, and that the Constitution needed to guard against a president who might commit misdeeds like those alleged against Hastings." See: Inside the Founding Fathers’ Debate Over What Constituted an Impeachable Offense


The bottom line is, the issue, dealing with a criminal acting President, was included in our Constitution under the impeachment process, and our Supreme Court never addressed the constitutionally authorized venue for charging, and then determining, if a president has engaged in criminal activity.


JWK


Why have a written constitution, approved by the people, if those who it is meant to control are free to make it mean whatever they wish it to mean?

.
It really is a complex issue to resolve with any certainty but, Article Two of our Constitution sets out unique situations under which our President is empowered to act, and sometimes those situations entail required actions which could be construed as criminal conduct by civilians. In view of these obvious facts, it becomes self-evident why our founders decided to have members of our Senate as a venue for holding a trial to determine guilt or innocence should the president be charged with “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors”.

The unique circumstances under which a president must sometimes act, requires a unique venue to determine quilt or innocence of our president if charged with a crime, committed while in office. And that venue, by the terms of our Constitution, appears to be the United States Senate, not our regular court system.

.
JWK

When violent hate America demonstrations occur in the U.S. (as they now are) and terrorist attacks begin on American soil, let us not forget it was the current Democrat Party Leadership who encouraged and invited millions upon millions of poverty-stricken, poorly educated, low-skilled, diseased, disabled, criminal, and un-vetted terrorist foreign nationals, into our country.

.
QUESTION: where in our Constitution has our regular court system been delegated an authority to try a President for alleged criminal activity engaged in while in office? It seems to me that authority is placed in the hands of Congress (House and Senate) the House to accuse, and our Senate to try and convict a President for “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors” committed while holding his/her office of public trust.

So, under what authority is our regular court system now prosecuting a former president for alleged crimes committed while his was in office?

JWK

America's wage-earning citizens have been made into taxed slaves to pay for the economic needs of millions upon millions of foreign nationals who have invaded the United States’ border.

.
Let us take a look at what our Constitution states with reference to trying a president for “high crimes and misdemeanors”.


The fact is, the House did Act on January 25, 2021, and filed H. RES. 24 with the Senate, charging Donald John Trump, President of the United States, for “high crimes and misdemeanors”.

This is the first step, under our Constitution to deal with a President who is alleged to have committed “high crimes and misdemeanors”. (Article I, Section 2, Clause 5: “The House of Representatives . . . shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.”).

And under our Constitution, Article I; Section 3, Clauses 6 we find:

"The Senate shall have the sole power to try all Impeachments.” And that includes trying the President for “high crimes and misdemeanors”



And the Senate did in fact exercise its sole power to try Donald John Trump for "high crimes and misdemeanors”.

And on February 13, 2021, Trump was acquitted of "high crimes and misdemeanors” by the following ROLL CALL VOTE
.
Had Trump been convicted by the Senate, as provided by our Constitution, the Senate could have then disqualified Trump to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States, and being convicted by the Senate, the door would also have then been opened to his being “…liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law." (Article I; Section 3, Clauses 7) But the Senate, exercising its sole power to try the President, acquitted him.



So, the question now is, under what Constitutional authorities did our hate Trump crowd lawfully indict and then prosecute Trump in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, which is infested with our hate-Trump crowd, when the constitutionally authorized venue to try the President for “high crimes and misdemeanors” is the Senate of the United States, under which he had already been acquitted?

.
JWK

When violent hate America demonstrations occur in the U.S. (as they now are) and terrorist attacks begin on American soil, let us not forget it was the current Democrat Party Leadership who encouraged and invited millions upon millions of poverty-stricken, poorly educated, low-skilled, diseased, disabled, criminal, and un-vetted terrorist foreign nationals, into our country.

.

What were considered impeachable offenses by our Founders, over which the United States Senate was delegated “sole power” to try and convict and accused party?

The historical evidence found HERE, (start at top of page eight) confirms the charges listed in the D.C. INDICTMENT OF TRUMP are those considered by our Founders as impeachable offenses, over which our United States Senate was delegated sole power to try and convict an accused party.

The D.C. District Court is the wrong venue for such a trial and violates our Constitution’s text and legislative intent.

JWK

When violent hate America demonstrations occur in the U.S. (as they now are) and terrorist attacks begin on American soil, let us not forget it was the current Democrat Party Leadership who encouraged and invited millions upon millions of poverty-stricken, poorly educated, low-skilled, diseased, disabled, criminal, and un-vetted terrorist foreign nationals, into our country.

Seems to me they got the wrong guy.

Joe Biden and family should be in court facing military tribunals in Gitmo.