General Discussion

StarfishSaver

(18,486 posts)

66. Your "layman's take" is correct

Reply to George II (Reply #65)

Wed Jun 9, 2021, 08:12 AM

Jun 2021

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

70 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

To those ranting about AG Garland's decision to oppose a lawsuit against President Trump... [View all] brooklynite Jun 2021 OP

I think Rebl2 Jun 2021 #1

This! mcar Jun 2021 #2

DFT is not in office anymore RainCaster Jun 2021 #3

It is a defamation suit she made against trump when he was president JohnSJ Jun 2021 #5

She's made it against him. NT. SayItLoud Jun 2021 #25

I didn't word it right. Thanks, edited JohnSJ Jun 2021 #41

DFT is also subject to lawsuits now... brooklynite Jun 2021 #6

Sure, up to a point. krkaufman Jun 2021 #55

Exactly. orangecrush Jun 2021 #27

The problem is most in the media have done a terrible job of reporting what this is about JohnSJ Jun 2021 #4

I am confused by your Supreme Court decision Bev54 Jun 2021 #7

Here is a statement of the wikipedia Bev54 Jun 2021 #8

Carroll's defamation suit against trump is for statements he made while in office. Goodheart Jun 2021 #10

It's not "Trump's" defense, it's a defense of the executive branch and the presidency. NYC Liberal Jun 2021 #15

This. StarfishSaver Jun 2021 #18

No he has no immunity to civil lawsuits as president Bev54 Jun 2021 #21

That only works for Democratic presidents Bettie Jun 2021 #51

No StarfishSaver Jun 2021 #54

Your analogy fails because trump is not in office. Goodheart Jun 2021 #9

The analogy hold because the lawsuit was filed when Trump was President. brooklynite Jun 2021 #20

The question isn't can a sitting president be sued while in office Fiendish Thingy Jun 2021 #11

This message was self-deleted by its author Scrivener7 Jun 2021 #12

The Name 'Clinton' Comes To Mind, Sir The Magistrate Jun 2021 #13

This may not make a difference to your aasessment StarfishSaver Jun 2021 #17

THANK YOU SIR orangecrush Jun 2021 #28

Exactly right. n/t Liberal In Texas Jun 2021 #34

Presidents cant be investigated while presidenting Fullduplexxx Jun 2021 #14

The issue isn't whether a sitting president can be sued while in office StarfishSaver Jun 2021 #16

You believe he made the statements cilla4progress Jun 2021 #44

No, I don't believe that StarfishSaver Jun 2021 #45

I misunderstood, then. cilla4progress Jun 2021 #46

I think DOJ's move is a reasonable one StarfishSaver Jun 2021 #53

Well, alot of strong legal minds disagree with you - cilla4progress Jun 2021 #58

Strong legal minds often disagree with each other -;it happens all the time StarfishSaver Jun 2021 #59

Barb McQuade? cilla4progress Jun 2021 #62

Well said nt ChrisF1961 Jun 2021 #19

Other than getting the law wrong... dpibel Jun 2021 #30

How do? ChrisF1961 Jun 2021 #33

How so? dpibel Jun 2021 #63

Oh ok ChrisF1961 Jun 2021 #64

All of you DOJ defenders gab13by13 Jun 2021 #22

She's not a lawyer. She's usually well prepared but on this case she's not, and she's wrong.... George II Jun 2021 #24

No she isn't gab13by13 Jun 2021 #29

There's MUCH more involved than this one case. Not defending trump in this defamation case.... George II Jun 2021 #31

Not true according to the lawyer on Rachel's show. gab13by13 Jun 2021 #35

Were does one draw the line? speak easy Jun 2021 #39

I'm a lawyer. And I think DOJ made a reasonable decision, even if I don't agree with it StarfishSaver Jun 2021 #40

From what I read, there are many cases where government employees are being sued... George II Jun 2021 #65

Your "layman's take" is correct StarfishSaver Jun 2021 #66

.... George II Jun 2021 #67

I agree. This is a weak case, and I hope a judge tosses the DOJ defense. Lonestarblue Jun 2021 #36

We all agree he wasn't performing his normal duties and that's up to a judge to decide for the sake uponit7771 Jun 2021 #70

Exactly. I wish people would read up on the Westfall Act. One attorney said earlier today that.... George II Jun 2021 #23

Thank you sir rpannier Jun 2021 #38

His statement was not that of a President performing their duty. LiberalFighter Jun 2021 #26

Exactly, gab13by13 Jun 2021 #32

+1. dalton99a Jun 2021 #37

What McQuade ignored ... StarfishSaver Jun 2021 #43

True but under Westfall Act the Biden admin SHOULD NOT decide that and it should be left up to ... uponit7771 Jun 2021 #47

Are these the only 2 choices? cilla4progress Jun 2021 #42

All Carrol has to do is speaknow Jun 2021 #48

+1, once a judge declares Putin's Whore's actions weren't in the rhelm of him job then Biden will uponit7771 Jun 2021 #49

today i heard more attacks on hunter/jo biden re china money etc- on rw radio certainot Jun 2021 #50

I have yet to hear a reasonable explanation for how dflprincess Jun 2021 #52

If you read the brief, you'll see that DOJ is not really making that argument. StarfishSaver Jun 2021 #57

**Breaking News** jalan48 Jun 2021 #56

Fortunately, AG Garland won't respond to a political slam ("act as Trump's personal attorney") brooklynite Jun 2021 #60

Wow. Do you talk regularly? jalan48 Jun 2021 #61

No, but I have 20 years of experience comparing DU and blogosphere demands to the real world brooklynite Jun 2021 #69

People don't get that the legal system treestar Jun 2021 #68