From: mhristodor714@gmail.com   
      
   On Monday, December 11, 2023 at 8:38:44 PM UTC-8, Michael wrote:   
   > The Court intimates that its decision is grounded in the Constitution. If   
   that is the case, Congress cannot provide a remedy against Presidential   
   misconduct, and the criminal laws of the United States are wholly inapplicable   
   to the President. I find    
   this approach completely unacceptable. I do not agree that, if the Office of   
   President is to operate effectively, the holder of that Office must be   
   permitted, without fear of liability and regardless of the function he is   
   performing, deliberately to    
   inflict injury on others by conduct that he knows violates the law.    
   >    
   > The Court nevertheless refuses to follow this course with respect to the   
   President. It makes no effort to distinguish categories of Presidential   
   conduct that should be absolutely immune from other categories of conduct that   
   should not qualify for that    
   level of immunity. The Court instead concludes that, whatever the President   
   does and however contrary to law he knows his conduct to be, he may, without   
   fear of liability, injure federal employees or any other person within or   
   without the Government.    
   >    
   > Until now, this concept had survived in this country only in the form of   
   sovereign immunity.    
   >    
   > Indeed, the majority turns this rule on its head by declaring that, because   
   the functions of the President's office are so varied and diverse and some of   
   them so profoundly important, the office is unique and must be clothed with   
   office-wide, absolute    
   immunity   
      
   ---------   
      
      
   In United States law, absolute immunity is a type of sovereign immunity for   
   government officials that confers complete immunity from criminal prosecution   
   and suits for damages, so long as officials are acting within the scope of   
   their duties.   
      
   --------   
      
   This part:    
   "so long as officials are acting within the scope of their duties."   
      
   Show me where in your job description your duty is to:    
   -illegally surveillance me    
   - illegally arrest me    
   - falsely accuse me   
   - ignore completely all my rights    
   - rob me    
    - blackmail me and extort ( using illegally taken videos during illegally   
   surveillance- not sure if considered porn revenge even!!)    
      
   And so on !    
      
   When I see all of the above in your job description or any paper proving   
   committing crimes is a scope of your duty ?    
   Then you can count on your immunity!    
      
   Nobody is above the law!    
   Equal protection of the law implies equal punishment !    
      
   Ok!?    
   Nobody is immune to crime !!!!!!    
   OK? When God will die !    
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)