Appeals Court Asks if President Trump Has “Absolute Immunity” When Ordering Assassination of American Citizen – Short Answer: Yes!

January 11, 2024

President Donald Trump’s lawyer was asked about presidential immunity on Tuesday, by Federal Judge Florence Pan. The specifics of the question surrounded if President Trump could order SEAL Team Six to assassinate an American citizen (or presidential candidate) and if Absolute Immunity would apply.

President Trump’s attorney was prepared to answer the hypothetical question with a “qualified yes“; however, unfortunately the lawyer was not prepared to give Judge Pan a real-world example of this action that recently took place. It’s not a hypothetical; it was done recently. President Obama did exactly this.

CITATION – “Anwar al-‘Awlaqī; (April 1971 – 30 September 2011) was an American Islamic scholar and lecturer who was killed in 2011 in Yemen by a U.S. government drone strike ordered by President Barack Obama. Al-Awlaki became the first U.S. citizen to be targeted and killed by a drone strike from the U.S government.

President Barack Obama had absolute immunity for ordering the intentional killing of American citizen, Anwar al-Awlaqi. The issue of him being a presidential candidate is a non sequitur.

If Presidents did not have absolute immunity, or if the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals removes absolute immunity from President Trump, then Barack Obama can immediately be charged and arrested for killing al-Awlaqi. There is no statute of limitations for murder. Yes, this is the cold truth of the matter.

Additionally, 16-year-old American Citizen, Abdulrahman al-Awlaki, was killed in the same military assassination. Abdulrahman, a child, was standing next to his father; he was never accused of any wrongdoing; he was never charged with any unlawful conduct; he was an innocent bystander.

In 2011 when the Obama administration was questioned about killing the teenager, White House Spokesperson Robert Gibbs said, “I would suggest that you should have a far more responsible father if they are truly concerned about the well-being of their children. I don’t think becoming an al-Qaeda jihadist terrorist is the best way to go about doing your business.”

You can find the legal analysis from the Justice Department Memo Approving Targeted Killing of Anwar Al-Awlaki [HERE]. There was no legal justification or approval for the killing of 16-year-old Abdulrahman al-Awlaki.

[Citation, pdf beginning Page 67]

If the DC Appeals Court removes “absolute immunity” in order to prosecute President Donald J Trump, then the next administration can formally charge President Barack Obama with the specific and unlawful killing of an American citizen, with malice aforethought and specific intent to kill; ie homicide. Additional charges of manslaughter for the killing of the 16-year-old son are easily justified.

There is no statute of limitations for murder.

See how that works?

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2024/01/11/appeals-court-asks-if-president-trump-has-absolute-immunity-when-ordering-assassination-of-american-citizen-short-answer-yes/

>>20229547

So they set up that court in DC, and the three women in their fervor to defend Obama and accuse Trump in a hypothetical scenario of the very crime Obama did. I have to rethink that situation based on the outcome.

Trumps lawyer said in order to be charged he would have to be successfully impeached, which Trump wasn’t. And neither was Obama. So is he sayjng since neither one was successfully impeached neither can be charged with a crime

Vivek Ramaswamy States Christie Exit Was Part of Larger Control Agenda – Predicts DeSantis to Become Haley Partner

January 10, 2024

In this video [see below], presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy is essentially describing the “splitter strategy” CTH has discussed and outlined in granular detail for years. Essentially, a process where the billionaire donors, hedge fund managers, corporations and multinationals – what we define as the Sea Island group (SIG), control the private corporation known as the RNC.

On this facet of his commentary, Ramaswamy is correct. However, from there he gets things wrong.

Yes, as we have said, the Chris Christie exit is part of the continuum. Remember, within mutually aligned motives the candidate doesn’t need specifically to be an active participant; they only need to be looking out for their individual interests, usually financial.

When the ‘time to exit’ tap on the shoulder is received, it comes via a key backer saying, “there’s no longer a path.” The money stops, and the candidate suspends their campaign. That’s how the process works.

Did Christie get that tap on the shoulder, at the specific time needed to retain the “never Trump” effort, thereby creating further support for Nikki Haley? Yes, absolutely – again, that’s how it works.

The SIG moved all their poker chips to Nikki after they realized the weird behavior of DeSantis meant he was no longer a viable option. When Brian Kemp began creating distance with DeSantis, that’s when the shift to Haley began.

Immediately preceding the shift to Nikki Haley, and specifically because DeSantis was not gaining traction, the evangelical brothers Mike Pence and Asa Hutchinson also received their tap on the shoulder and withdrew from their Iowa effort.

Within the plan of the SIG, Pence/Hutchinson were only camped in Iowa to pull a coalition of evangelicals together to hand them to DeSantis. But that part of the effort never gained traction. As a consequence, the SIG shifted to New Hampshire, where their allied Democrats could assist.

Ramaswamy is correct in the statement that the billionaire donors within the SIG want a head-to-head between President Trump and Nikki Haley, but only because that’s all that remains of the collapsing roadmap. Where Ramaswamy is wrong is that when Haley loses, the SIG/Never Trump group will shift to supporting Biden (Newsom). That’s the UniParty. Ultimately, in the big picture, the foundational effort is not about supporting DeSantis or Haley, it’s about stopping Trump.

The hubris of Vivek Ramaswamy in this video then makes everything else he says ridiculous, and also explains why he cannot gain traction.

Who is Ramaswamy to say, “our America-First movement“? As if this is something he created. :::spit::: Right there, in that statement, is where we notice who Ramaswamy is. He is trying to co-opt the MAGA Trump movement for his own motives and intents.

There is only one person who holds the allegiance of the American working class and the America First movement. That person is President Donald Trump. President Trump alone will decide later who will take that pragmatic economic-based MAGA movement forward – after his four-year term. This is not that time.

At CTH we accept things as they are, not as we would pretend them to be.

If Vivek Ramaswamy was authentic to his words, if he really wanted to advance the America First movement, he would accept the futility of his position and endorse Donald J. Trump. His unwillingness to do that says more about him, about his [¹]’glowing‘ motives and intents, than anything he might say about Nikki Haley and Ron DeSantis.

WATCH 01:33 minutes:

[¹]I have stayed generally neutral on Ramaswamy for a reason. However, he is now sending the exact signals I would expect to see if an intelligence community operator was nearing the end of his usefulness. It’s called ‘Linguistic Programming‘. ie“they will never allow,” etc.

Sundance is brilliant

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2024/01/10/vivek-ramaswamy-states-christie-exit-was-part-of-larger-control-agenda-predicts-desantis-to-become-haley-partner/

https://youtu.be/hMv66D7Nr2U