President Trump’s claims of absolute immunities.

Oct 2009
537
99
Cliffside Park, NJ
President Trump’s claims of absolute immunities:

The author, David Frum apparently has arrived at a conclusion similar to my own. Trump is forcing regrettable national precedents to transpire. Refer to
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/heads-trump-wins-tails-we-all-lose/ar-BXmnei?ocid=spartanntp

President Trump’s insistence on absolute or almost absolute immunity for the office of the presidency and both current and former members of the president’s administration, or the president’s associates, when legally tested, will consequentially result in additional precedents and laws.

Members of congress must (no less than the president), obey and defend the U.S. Constitution. President Trump is not (as he claims to be), defending the prerogatives of all presidents and their administrations.
Due to President Trump’s claims of absolute immunity for current and prior member or associate of the president’s administration or his personal associates to being subject to Congressional inquiry, he is forcing precedents to be set that will to some extent hobble our nation’s future federal administrations and/or congresses.

Respectfully, Supposn
 
Jul 2019
7,856
4,702
Georgia
thank you for sharing

Frum has been on the cutting edge of this since the beginning, so I always enjoy reading his "I told you so" pieces.
 
  • Like
Reactions: intangible child

LTP

Mar 2018
1,884
372
Undisclosed Bunker
President Trump’s claims of absolute immunities:

The author, David Frum apparently has arrived at a conclusion similar to my own. Trump is forcing regrettable national precedents to transpire. Refer to
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/heads-trump-wins-tails-we-all-lose/ar-BXmnei?ocid=spartanntp

President Trump’s insistence on absolute or almost absolute immunity for the office of the presidency and both current and former members of the president’s administration, or the president’s associates, when legally tested, will consequentially result in additional precedents and laws.

Members of congress must (no less than the president), obey and defend the U.S. Constitution. President Trump is not (as he claims to be), defending the prerogatives of all presidents and their administrations.
Due to President Trump’s claims of absolute immunity for current and prior member or associate of the president’s administration or his personal associates to being subject to Congressional inquiry, he is forcing precedents to be set that will to some extent hobble our nation’s future federal administrations and/or congresses.

Respectfully, Supposn
You do not understand the brilliance of Trump. He got the U.S. Senate to show up and protest the very rules Republicans put into place. But, you're right about one thing, he is creating a lot of bad legal precedents and the downside is, most people will pretend to understand what you just wrote, but really they do not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: intangible child
Nov 2013
2,766
1,225
NM
Surely middle-class standards of morality do not apply to Trump, because they just do apply to the rich who expect to have everything go their way. Wouldn't we all love to have so much freedom and power.
Not apply, yes?

Well, yah; but he's such a middlin' kinda guy - I figure dead middle o' the pack is precisely the place for him. If there's some frontrunner involved, it's just some guy - who's fast - that the Trump paid to take his place. A kind of throwback to the US Civil War days, when if you had sufficient money, you could hire some poor guy to stand-in for you. The draft board was happy, the stand-in was happy, momentarily (or his heirs, anyway). Who could ask for anything more?

Hey, are you gonna finish that?
 
Feb 2014
3,221
1,462
Oregon
Not apply, yes?

Well, yah; but he's such a middlin' kinda guy - I figure dead middle o' the pack is precisely the place for him. If there's some frontrunner involved, it's just some guy - who's fast - that the Trump paid to take his place. A kind of throwback to the US Civil War days, when if you had sufficient money, you could hire some poor guy to stand-in for you. The draft board was happy, the stand-in was happy, momentarily (or his heirs, anyway). Who could ask for anything more?

Hey, are you gonna finish that?
I hate it when I forget that little word "not".

Yes, America has a double standard of living. There are distinct classes of people, and what divides them is the rules of survival. Those in well to do families will learn self-control and to assert themselves with the expectation of getting what they want. At home, they are being prepared to be leaders. However, the working class must learn to endure hardships without complaining and to obey without question. The failure of not complying with working-class rules is unemployment for insubordination and possibly failure to get housing for being offensive to the landlord when simply arguing for legally protection special accommodations for disabled people. It would be nice if we were aware of these differences and considered doing something them. Something like insisting on using the democratic model for industry instead of the autocratic model.

Not only do the well to do and poor raise their children for their inherited positions in life, but the school districts strongly enforce the difference. Unfortunately the poor know no better.

Whatever, those who are born into wealth and born into privilege and the poor are born to serve.
 
  • Like
Reactions: imaginethat
Nov 2013
2,766
1,225
NM
...

Not only do the well to do and poor raise their children for their inherited positions in life, but the school districts strongly enforce the difference. Unfortunately the poor know no better.

Whatever, those who are born into wealth and born into privilege and the poor are born to serve.
I disagree. If the former were the sole criterion, the franchise in the US would still only extend to 6% or so of the population, as it did early on in the republic. Our civic history has been a struggle to widen the franchise, to where nearly everyone can vote - whether they do or not.

Thomas Jefferson paraphrased Richard Rumbold (Rumbold was a British subject executed for his political views in 1685, shortly before Britain’s Glorious Revolution of 1688):

“All eyes are open to or opening to…the palpable truth that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately, by the grace of God.”

If wealth & power by birth were the only meter, then we have to explain how Alexander Hamilton rose from obscurity & poverty, & all the various men & women who likewise rose from dim prospects.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Clara007
Feb 2014
3,221
1,462
Oregon
Nixon said the president was above the law.

Trump's claim of absolute immunity is his saying so what if I break laws? Sure I break 'em. What do you think you can do about it?
Article II section 4 says "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." I am not understanding the failure to remove him from the office because of bribery? What is the different between making a deal and bribery?

What is considered bribery?
Bribery refers to the offering, giving, soliciting, or receiving of any item of value as a means of influencing the actions of an individual holding a public or legal duty. ... Bribery constitutes a crime and both the offeror and the recipient can be criminally charged.
Bribery | Wex | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute

https://www.law.cornell.edu › wex › bribery
The military support of the US is a pretty important item of value, don't you think? But what nation is not getting this military support? Israel, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Ukraine. Are we to believe all these countries get our military support with no strings attached? o_O Is the Trump situation different because the threat to withhold military support was about a private "item of value" rather than one of national interest?

I am far more concerned with Article II section 1 "The President shall, at stated times, receive for his services, a compensation, which shall neither be increased nor diminished during the period for which he shall have been elected, and he shall not receive within that period any other emolument from the United States, or any of them." It may have been short-sighted to not include "or from any other country". This is what I want to be investigated. Is the Trump family profiting from the power of the presidency and is this different from the corruption of leaders in other countries? This might include the investigation of past presidents using the office to feather their own nest. Do we have a problem with corruption and if so, where is the media, and what steps should be taken to correct the problem?
 
Feb 2014
3,221
1,462
Oregon
I disagree. If the former were the sole criterion, the franchise in the US would still only extend to 6% or so of the population, as it did early on in the republic. Our civic history has been a struggle to widen the franchise, to where nearly everyone can vote - whether they do or not.

Thomas Jefferson paraphrased Richard Rumbold (Rumbold was a British subject executed for his political views in 1685, shortly before Britain’s Glorious Revolution of 1688):

“All eyes are open to or opening to…the palpable truth that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately, by the grace of God.”

If wealth & power by birth were the only meter, then we have to explain how Alexander Hamilton rose from obscurity & poverty, & all the various men & women who likewise rose from dim prospects.
I am sure you know, one truth does not necessarily cancel out another. If you want to argue there is no difference between how the young of the well-off experience life and how the young of the laboring class experience life, with both being prepared for very different positions in life, I need some evidence that the difference in survival needs and differences in parenting does not exist.

Hamilton rose because he had great mentors. This is as good as or better than having great parents.

Hugh Knox

Another mentor who helped along the way was the Reverend Hugh Knox who taught young Hamilton that his life was not pre-‐destined. This undoubtedly appealed to him. After several years the two mentors got enough money together to send young Alexander to the colonies for an education.
Alexander Hamilton Americas' First Rags to Riches Story
www.driven2teach.org › public › lessons › boston-philadelphia › Alexander..
Hamilton was also born into a position of high status that surely set his opinion that he was of the privileged class, and made his mentors think he was deserving of better, kind of like Oliver Twist.

Alexander Hamilton was born in Charlestown, Nevis, in the West Indies on January 11, 1757 (or 1755), to James Hamilton, a Scottish merchant of St. Christopher, and Rachel Fawcett. Rachel's father was a Huguenot physician and planter.
Yes, democracy strives to give everyone the opportunity to achieve their highest potential and make their best contribution to society, but our industry is autocratic and that is the enemy of democracy. The untapped resources of the new land gave everyone equal opportunity to claim those natural resources and achieve great wealth and that is no longer our reality. You speak of an ideal, not exactly a reality.

At the beginning of our nation, there were not enough people to do all the work. That is always good for workers. There were free resources throughout the wilderness, and no establishment over the people so just about any hardworking person with a little luck could rise. We need to be realistic. New technologies and public education have given our young great opportunities, but that in no changes what I said and the class division. Without a family member who held a respected position or a mentor, today's education is not enough to make that important difference. Getting ahead is not just about learning a technological skill, it is also about character and learned social skills and expectations. Not just what the child expects to have in life, but also what those around him expect of him. If you can, watch movies of teachers who made a difference, and schools that were just warehouses for the young.

Bottom line, it is unrealistic to think Trump lives with middle morality.
 
Last edited: