President Trump’s lawyer David Shon says Obama can still be impered

Web Desk,

President Trump’s lawyer David Shonn has only told Newsmax that there is a way for President Barak Hussain Obama to snatch him from his President’s immunity.

See here:

Full transcript:

President Trump is correct when he said that the immune decision would help President Obama.

But you know what it does not help with him? Impeachment.

According to the Democratic Party and the House Manager in the second impeachment test, a former president, once out of office, is still subject to impeachment.

In other words, he has argued that Lincoln can be impeached, George Washington imperedes, and of course, as I predicted at that time, it will come back – they will bother the day – because President Obama can be impeached if this evidence really says what it says.

And that it can also snatch it from immunity because under Article 1, Section 3, section 7 of the Constitution, Democrats argued that it is once in the lead post and the language itself says that you are still subject to criminal prosecution or prosecution.

So we will see how it plays.

Backup here when needed:

With all due respect for Attorney Scone, I will pay you attention to that none of these tasks have been covered from distance by the President’s immunity in the first place:

Update: President Obama does not have immunity for Rousgate – two reasons!

Yesterday, I completely dismissed this report that Barak Hussain Obama could claim the President’s immunity for his traitored coupler against President Trump.

In Case You Missed It:

No – of course Barack Obama does not have the “Immunity of the President” for Rousgate

In that report, I focused on the fact that Obama could not legally claim the President’s immunity for anything outside the scope of the “official acts” of the presidential presidential.

And of course spying on an expedition, creating evidence, making DOJ weapons, and everything he did is out of the purview of “official acts”.

ALSO READ  Here's Why Your Stock Broker HATES Crypto -- and WHEN and WHY They'll Suddenly Flip! | WLT Report

Therefore any immune claim fails on those grounds.

And I think Rousgate/Obamaget is the most obvious and easiest way to reduce any claim of immunity of the President.

But now Mike Davis adds a second angle which is also strong.

Davis explains that you do not get immunity to do anything after leaving the office, which means that anything is completely insecure with immunity since January 2017:

🚨Breaking: Mike Davis states that Obama does not have the President’s immunity on Russia Haux.

It is said that all co-speculators live within the laws of boundaries and can be charged under an ongoing criminal conspiracy.

Davis then saying that everyone should be nervous and justice is coming:

“The President’s immunity covers his actions while he is the President, not when he is the former President. When he is participating in the coverup of this conspiracy, he does not have the President’s immunity.”

“They say that we are beyond the law of boundaries, you are not. It is an ongoing criminal conspiracy. To stop the plot, you have to dismiss it.”

“They are still covering the conspiracy and are paying themselves to themselves. We saw high ranking Obama officials. We are well within the boundaries law.”

“For these Democrats, justice is coming. I am very scared. There will be a lot of place in the bureau of jails.”

So if someone (including President Trump) tells you that Obama only claims the immunity of the President, please show him this article.

Why do I think President Trump said, read this:

No – of course Barack Obama does not have the “Immunity of the President” for Rousgate

There is a lot of revolving around today that even if Barack Obama has exposed Tulsi Gabbard, even if he does everything, it does not matter because he has “immunity to the President”.

Like this:

And this:

To be fair, President Trump himself said that Obama is likely to see in the clip above, so everyone is a parrot that only the President Trump is parrot.

ALSO READ  Exclusive: Nick Sorter records first known video inside Antifa safehouse in Portland

But it’s a good thing that you have set me all this straight.

Brief Answer: This is full nonsense!

And I will tell you why…

Yes, it is true that the Supreme Court last year gave President Trump immune to President Trump in that historic Supreme Court case, but it is not an empty check to do whatever you want.

Even though he was very widely the decision of the Supreme Court, it still has limitations, and they are limitations that it only applies to the “official acts” of the office.

In other words, when you are president and claims the President’s immunity, you can shoot someone, it does not work like this.

So why would President Trump call it?

Because he is a full master in misunderstanding!

When you should be very worried, it makes you gentle, and when you should be deceased, it stimulates you.

This is the classic sun taju “Art of War” 101.

And this is what I think he is doing here, the classic misconception for Obama and MSM, meanwhile he is about the trap about spring!

It is the basic constitutional law that you do not get immunity outside “official acts” and spying on your opponent’s campaign, arming the evidence to make DOJ weapons, which goes directly against the real intellect, and trying to frame your political rival, which you do not know that they do not know.

And no, we do not have to prove that to implement Obama’s actions, the President’s defense has to complete the definition of “sedition”. They are two different issues and are completely intervened to each other.

Whether it is a traitor (or numerous) is an issue.

Can he claim that the President’s immunity is a completely different issue.

ALSO READ  Dan Bongino Releases HUGE Update | WLT Report

I always like to check my work, so I went into the chat and run all this through AI, and AI really confirmed what I told you:

✅ What did the Supreme Court say about the President’s immunity?

  • The court said The President has extensive immunity for “official acts” He did while living in office.

  • One Official act This means that the President is allowed to do as part of his job – such as signing the bill, appointing judges, or giving military orders.

  • The court also called a president Not immune for informal or private acts— Hing out of his job.

❌ Can President claim immunity for crimes like murder?

No.
If a president shot someone on the road, he is not part of his job.
It is a crime, not official duty. Does not cover immunity.

So brief answer: The immunity of the President applies only to official acts, not personal crimes or things outside the job.

⚖ How do the courts decide what is “official”?

  • They see Nature of actThe President’s aim is not.

  • If the Act is something that can only do under the Constitution or Law, it can be considered “official”.

  • But if the Act is just political dirty tricks, campaign work, or personal benefits, then it is not official,

🧠 Your imaginary: President detective, frames an opponent, orders DOJ for fake reports

  • To spy on a rival’s campaign and create fake evidence No legislative duty of president,

  • chairman Can’t order Doj to break the law Or make a report. It is the power of misbehavior for personal or political reasons.

  • Even though it is not counted as “treason”, it is still illegal And Out of legitimate presidential duties,

Can the President claim immunity?

  • They probably EffortWhile arguing, “I was directing my job Doj-Part.”

  • But the courts will probably say: You crossed the line. Doing DOJ is not an official task. It is a crime and misuse of power.

  • so, Immunity will not apply,

✅ bottom line

  • Official Act = Comprehensive Security.

  • Personal crime, political sabotage, or corrupt work = no immunity.

  • In your scenario, the President is almost certainly Will not be immuneBecause the action is out of criminal and legitimate duties of the office.

United States