Comments by "Tom Bombadill" (@pefo1674) on "Supreme Court to weigh in on Trump immunity" video.

  1. You DO know that Scotus doesn´t have to take it up, right ? Besides, it saves the US tax-payers a whole lotta´ money...
    6
  2. He, and his inept team of lawyers, did... Both parties asked for "summary judgement"... It´s a case of "beware what you ask for..."
    4
  3. Hence, the 4 indictments, so far, with 91 felonies...
    2
  4. Well, the master needs the apprentice in the WH... Or he´s toast in the Ukraine...
    2
  5.  @johnlyn1  Unless you read the indictments, compare to US law, then hear him adit to everything...
    1
  6. Reminds me of an old Chinese proverb (that´s a curse, BTW)... "May you live in interesting times"
    1
  7. Not dominion, silly... Tucker was "fired" because Faux "news" didn´t wanna be liable for his personal law-suit...
    1
  8. #45 Cheato "eventual" immunity" is well, interesting... Should a president be allowed to, w/o evidence, try to overturn an election... Mark well that it would apply to all future ones as well, on both sides...
    1
  9.  @toma6838  That makes zero sense... He isn´t paid by the # of cases, silly...
    1
  10.  @GorbiDunkle  Exemplify...
    1
  11.  @MYJEWISHLAMPSHADES  1. "tRump can´t fix the USA..." Fixed it... 2. All-caps = Instant fail
    1
  12.  @GorbiDunkle  That´s Faux "news", not Google...
    1
  13.  @MYJEWISHLAMPSHADES  You answered...
    1
  14. What "evidences" ?
    1
  15.  @patrickmartin400  Not if Scotus says he can be prosecuted...
    1
  16.  @patrickmartin400  Yet you claim to "know" the inner thoughts of a judge...
    1
  17.  @patrickmartin400  Then don´t write as if you do...
    1
  18.  @TRmPisthebestEver  One just needs evidence...
    1