Here is the major question....

With the Supreme Court Ruling..... Did Obama have PRESIDENTIAL IMMUNITY?   Was anything he did considered or apart of his duty/actions as a president?

The others could be thrown under the bus.  But Obama could be saved by the Supreme Courts Ruling.

Just saying.   Remember how I talk about if one is innocent so is the other type thing.  We need more info/evidence.   But this is another case once all facts are laid out.... If Trump was innocent or things fall under official acts of a president.  Would these as well for Obama once evidence/facts are all laid out.   If you say NO... then possibly Trump would be guilty too.    Just saying.  We need all the facts.

without the words "cunt" or "douche" in it.   Did you start on Prevagen to improve your brain, or what?  

So then Obama is guilty.

That is your take and should go to jail.... just like Trump once he is out of office.   Since you can't arrest a sitting president.

from criminal prosecutions for official acts during his tenure involving his core constitutional powers and presumptive immunity for other official acts? And this is immunity from prosecution - not merely immunity from being tried – the president cannot even be indicted.  

Nor, as one poster suggested, is this a case where, if Trump is guilty, Mr. Obama is guilty- and vice versa.
SCOTUS did not rule Trump was immune for the fake electors scheme, or the January 6 speech and tweets and instead remanded for the trial court to determine if he was acting as President Trump, or Candidate Trump. Mr. Obama was never acting as Candidate Obama. And the “Obama administration” is not Obama. I have not seen a single allegation by Tulsi that Mr. Obama personally did anything unlawful to subvert the Trump presidency, unlike Trump who lobbied the fake electors personally,  told his followers lies, and told Brad to find the votes he needed to win.

on your part to leave the word, "cunt", out of ONE post.  It was too good to be true.  

"Supremes already (falsely and incorrectly) ruled that POTUS has immunity."

That is your quote.

So IF what was brought up is TRUE.... obama wouldn't have immunity and is guilty.  Just like Trump would be guilty.

on TER, I have never sucked ANY cocks in my entire lifetime.  It's not the least bit appealing, much less a bucket-list item, which is an excuse sometimes used by the cocksuckers that post on TER.  

but even that is too gay for me.    You seem to be a little wound up today.   Do you want to take a break and collect your wits before we move on?   (When you are collecting your wits, make sure you don't lose any.  You have precious few to start with.)

a moment of empathy towards someone that is so ill-equipped to be here.  By lashing out like this, you just prove it.   I'm not leaving, I can still respond to others, but it's YOU that seems to need a rest break.  You can have one if you want, but if you don't, it's only going to get worse until you get a little rest.  

NO.... I stated that IF it is found out that Obama actions were considered to be "official acts" of a sitting President.  Then he has immunity.   Just like they said Trumps actions were considered "official acts".

I never said they did the exact same thing.

What I said is that the out come is the exact same thing.

FUCK you are just like every liberal twisting shit.

They are deemed OFFICIAL ACTS... that is the same thing.... ie:   WHICH IS LEGAL DEEMED BY THE SUPREME COURT.

So again.... if people think Trump was immune so is Obama if any actions are deemed official acts of a President.  He is innocent.  GET IT.   It is all on if things are considered "OFFICIAL ACTS".   Which is a fucking broad brush.

Trumps immunity case was the 4 charges brought up by Jack Smith.  

Also the "falsifying" was done by his "fixer"... not by Trump which was already proven...multiple times.  Trump can't be found liable for something his lawyer does unless they have direct evidence, he directed him to do it.  Which isn't one person saying this.  Need a written documentation, audio/video documentation, multiple witnesses, etc.  EVEN THEN a lawyer has code of ethics and law license that says he must say NO or he is breaking the law.   The "they told me too" isn't the 100% defense people think it is.  It can get charges on Trump but not as bad as the person who actually did them.

You telling me "new" evidence has just "popped" up about 10 years later???