- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: SCOTUS Hears Case - POTUS Trump's lawyer offers no rebuttal.
Posted on 4/25/24 at 12:03 pm to GumboPot
Posted on 4/25/24 at 12:03 pm to GumboPot
quote:
I listened to about 75% of the testimony. It sounded like the government was trying to make the distinction between the presidents private matters and official matters.
I missed most but heard enough to hear their argument was Trump was acting as a private citizen (or "office seeker") during the acts in question and not as a government official (or "office holder")
That's the whole crux of their argument
quote:
IDK which way this is headed.
LawTuber Good Lawgic watched the arguments and his immediate post-proceedings reaction was the 5 men will be for Trump... the 3 liberals will be against Trump... and ACB is a wild card that could go either way or just concur with either side
2
Posted on 4/25/24 at 12:06 pm to rt3
quote:
LawTuber Good Lawgic watched the arguments and his immediate post-proceedings reaction was the 5 men will be for Trump... the 3 liberals will be against Trump... and ACB is a wild card that could go either way or just concur with either side
And if this happens? Does all this Federal stuff go away?
Posted on 4/25/24 at 12:58 pm to rt3
quote:
Trump was acting as a private citizen (or "office seeker") during the acts in question and not as a government official (or "office holder")
They said some was private and some was official.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News