Comments by "Charles Brightman" (@charlesbrightman4237) on "Supreme Court considers Trump's immunity, ahead of historic decision" video.

Consider the following: Crimes committed outside being President are still prosecutable.
3
@timc9893 Consider the following, for any US President: A President swears an oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution. Any US President that passes a law that is deemed un-Constitutional would be grounds to impeach that President for violation of their oath of office to the American people. Laws should be reviewed for Constitutionality BEFORE being passed, not after.
3
Consider the following: Crimes committed outside being President are still prosecutable.
3
For adolfocamblor: 'We' have a system of laws to have a more orderly society. If the society breaks down, so do the laws. Answer these questions though: QUESTIONS: US President acting within being President: a. A terrorist is in a foreign city, and there are even American citizens in that foreign city, and the US President bombs that city to take out the terrorist, BUT many American citizens and Foreign citizens are no longer with the living. That would be okay? And sure, the foreign nation would most probably want to retaliate. But okay from the US President's perspective? b. Now another hypothetical: A terrorist is in a domestic US city filled with many American citizens, no other foreign citizens are in that city. The US President bombs that city to take out the terrorist but many American citizens are no longer with the living. That would be okay? Is there a magic number as to how many American citizens can be taken out so as to take out even a single terrorist? And even if there is, would it matter to a US President who was just 'acting within their job description' of taking out terrorists?
2
@timc9893 So, should our system of government be amended?
2
CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING: Concerning Presidential Immunity: Kind of like a choose your own adventure. In a system of 'self governance' what do we, individually and as a society of individuals choose? a. A single person who has possibly the most power and authority on this Earth and is completely immune from all prosecution. If so, that is the path the nation would go down. b. No person is above the law, not even a sitting US President. A law in a small town is just as valid as the US Constitution. The law is the law. A sitting US President violates even a small town's law, the US President is held accountable for their crime. If so, that is the path the nation would go down. c. Some line in between the 2 extremes. Whatever and wherever that line is, that would be the path the nation would go down. * So, what path do we, individually and as a society of individuals, want to go down? Only 1 single path is allowed. Not choosing and one is automatically chosen for us, whatever system we have is the system we have. If we choose, what path do we choose? How exactly do we, individually and as a society of individuals, want to exist while we do exist? We do have choices especially in a system of 'self governance'.
2
QUESTIONS: US President acting within being President: a. A terrorist is in a foreign city, and there are even American citizens in that foreign city, and the US President bombs that city to take out the terrorist, BUT many American citizens and Foreign citizens are no longer with the living. That would be okay? And sure, the foreign nation would most probably want to retaliate. But okay from the US President's perspective? b. Now another hypothetical: A terrorist is in a domestic US city filled with many American citizens, no other foreign citizens are in that city. The US President bombs that city to take out the terrorist but many American citizens are no longer with the living. That would be okay? Is there a magic number as to how many American citizens can be taken out so as to take out even a single terrorist? And even if there is, would it matter to a US President who was just 'acting within their job description' of taking out terrorists?
2
CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING: Concerning Presidential Immunity: Kind of like a choose your own adventure. In a system of 'self governance' what do we, individually and as a society of individuals choose? a. A single person who has possibly the most power and authority on this Earth and is completely immune from all prosecution. If so, that is the path the nation would go down. b. No person is above the law, not even a sitting US President. A law in a small town is just as valid as the US Constitution. The law is the law. A sitting US President violates even a small town's law, the US President is held accountable for their crime. If so, that is the path the nation would go down. c. Some line in between the 2 extremes. Whatever and wherever that line is, that would be the path the nation would go down. * So, what path do we, individually and as a society of individuals, want to go down? Only 1 single path is allowed. Not choosing and one is automatically chosen for us, whatever system we have is the system we have. If we choose, what path do we choose? How exactly do we, individually and as a soceity of individuals, want to exist while we do exist? We do have choices especially in a system of 'self governance'.
1
@adolfocamblor9295 'We' have a system of laws to have a more orderly society. If the society breaks down, so do the laws. Answer these questions though: QUESTIONS: US President acting within being President: a. A terrorist is in a foreign city, and there are even American citizens in that foreign city, and the US President bombs that city to take out the terrorist, BUT many American citizens and Foreign citizens are no longer with the living. That would be okay? And sure, the foreign nation would most probably want to retaliate. But okay from the US President's perspective? b. Now another hypothetical: A terrorist is in a domestic US city filled with many American citizens, no other foreign citizens are in that city. The US President bombs that city to take out the terrorist but many American citizens are no longer with the living. That would be okay? Is there a magic number as to how many American citizens can be taken out so as to take out even a single terrorist? And even if there is, would it matter to a US President who was just 'acting within their job description' of taking out terrorists?
1
@adolfocamblor9295 I replied to you but YT hid my comment on my screen. I also posted the comment to the thread holder for you to see. If you cannot see either reply, 'Sort by' up above, select 'Newest first', scroll down to this thread and select 'replies'.
1
@jeffreyhoppock7140 ULTIMATE SURVIVAL CHALLENGE (USC) ('Winners' get to have their species continue to exist further into future eternity) * Modern science claims that there have been 5 mass extinction events already on this Earth. * We might be in the 6th now due to Earth's magnetism issues. * Modern science also claims that the Sun will wipe out all life on this Earth one day if not even the entire Earth itself. Sure, a long time from now, but the destination is set like a way point on a journey. * Our spiral shaped galaxy is most probably collapsing in upon itself. * The universe always existed in some form and never had a beginning, the singular big bang theory is a fairy tale for various reasons. Galaxies come into existence, with eventually new life in them, which then those galaxies most probably collapse in upon themselves, 'bang', eventually generating a new galaxy with new life in it, eternally repeating. The universe is most probably going to always actively exist in some form and will not end in a big freeze. 'Winners' get to continue to survive potentially throughout all of future eternity. Good Luck Earthlings! Game On! (NOTE: In the event all life dies and goes extinct, this USC, as well as all of life itself, real and artificial, automatically become null and void as there would be no life left to care.)
1