LOS ANGELES.–President Joe Biden, 81, denounced the Supreme Court rulings yesterday, giving former President Trump immunity for official acts as president, essentially rejecting the Constitution and the rule of law because the Supreme Court is the rule of law in the United States. Biden’s message was no Democrat that wants to defeat Trump should support the Supreme Court’s ruling, telling voters to reject one of the three independent coequal branches of the U.S. government. So when Biden says Trump wants to destroy democracy and rule as a dictator, what’s Biden saying about rejecting the Supreme Court ruling? Biden, of course, doesn’t know what he’s saying after his June 27 debate performance showed for all to see that he’s not coherent or capable of communicating. Biden tries to rehab himself sticking to Democrat talking points on his teleprompter.
Former Atty. Gen. Bill Barr, 74, said Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor was the worst example of judicial partisanship. “The worst example I think, the one that makes no sense whatsoever, is the idea he [the president] can use Seal Team 6 to kill a political opponents. The president has the authority to defend the country against foreign enemies, armed conflicts and so forth,” Barr told Fox News. Barr objects to Sotomayor’s analogies of how the new Supreme Court ruling grants the president extra power to engage in any criminal act. Chief Justice John Roberts said Monday that president does not have absolute immunity like a monarch but only for official acts, not for unofficial or private acts. Sotomayor uses her dissent to complain about the most absurd worse case scenarios. Sotomayor doesn’t like that Special Counsel Jack Smith can’t go ahead to prosecute Trump for obstruction.
All Conservative Supreme Court Justice figured out what was at stake in the presidential immunity case. They know that the Democrat, media-driven, partisan Justice Department used the powers of the state of charge and prosecute former President Donald Trump. Forget about the fact that there’s no evidence that Trump participated in any way with the Capitol vandalism on Jan. 6., 2021. Yet the House Democrat Jan. 6 Select Committee took a year-and-a-half to conclude that Trump was responsible for the Capitol riots, Democrats called an “insurrection.” No one objective analysis proves that an armed rebellion took place on Jan. 6, 2021. Rabble rousers were armed with cell phones, not AR-15 assault rifles. Yet Democrat continue, to this day, the narrative that Trump planned and organized the Jan. 6 insurrection. Supreme Court’s ruling threw cold water on the baseless allegations.
Giving Trump immunity for official acts stops zealous Democrat prosecutors from abusing their authority to fabricate probable cause to charge Trump with a wide variety of felonies. Whatever crimes the Department of Justice charged Trump, they’re all now subject to Trump’s appropriate presidential immunity. What does that have to do with Trump ordering assassinations of his political rivals? Trump was the victim of zealous partisan prosecution for a variety of fabricated crimes. Well, now Democrats have to think twice about just charging political opponents with criminal offenses when nothing of the sort existed. Sotomayor contends that the Supreme Court ruling “complete insulate[s] presidents from criminal liability,” a complete fabrication. Roberts said clearly that presidents are limited to only official acts, not unofficial or private acts.
Sotomayor has deliberately deceived anyone reading her dissenting opinion, not acknowledging the immunity limits imposed by the majority ruling. “When he uses the official power in any way, under the majority reasoning, he now will be insulated from criminal prosecution,” Sotomayor said. How ironic that a Supreme Court justice can use partisan arguments to advance the Democrat agenda of preventing Trump from running for president. Sotomayor, like other Democrats, want Trump to face all of the bogus charges by partisan Democrts in the Department of Justice and Special Counsel’s office. What was Trump supposed to do when he was investigated by the FBI for years for completely fabricated charges of his collusion with the Kremlin? Sotomayor knows that the majority opinion attempts to prevent malicious political prosecution.
Barr said he thought the majority gave a reasoned ruling based on the Constitution and rule of law. Sotomayor’s dissent panders to the partisan voices that want to bury Trump in legal problems to undermine his 2024 campaign. “I think this was very sensible decision that I think most lawyers familiar with the area expected . . . which is this went up to the court in a very abstract posture, which was the government’s very broad assertion there was no immunity whatsoever,” Barr said, agreeing with the majority ruling. Barr had plenty or run-ins with Trump, becoming a favorite in the liberal press to denounce the former president. But when it comes to legal analysis, he’s trying his level best to give a nonpartisan view. Justices knew that the Department of Justice and Special Counsel are controlled by Democrat zealots looking to stop Trump presidential run.
About the Author
John M. Curtis writes politically neutral commentary analyzing spin in national and global news. He’s editor of OnlineColumnist.com and author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma.
