This post may contain Fetish content.
AdultFetish
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Should former President Obama sue President Trump now that the FBI has said Obama did not have surveillance ordered on Trump?

I know he won't.
But I think he should.

Suing Trump will bring Trump to court to defend his lies, his "allegations", and his "alternative facts". At the moment he just sends out his pooper-scoopers to deal with his s***.

Obama can legitimately claim that Trump has defamed him by falsely imprinted in the minds of millions of people around the world that Obama had Trump and Trump Tower "wire tapped".

Trump apparently has billlions of dollars.
Perhaps if he has to shake some out of his wallet whenever he lies and tweets fabrications and conspiracy theories, he will think twice.

But that implies he has thinks first, to begin with.
He doesn't.
He parrots Fox News, Alex Jones, and a host of wing-nut theorists.

Let him put his moneynwhere his lying mouth is.


Trump knows Obama won't sue.
And that's the shame of it.

I'm wishing he would.
But I believe Obama will put America first, and not sue this unhinged, immature, and embarrassing Tweeter in Chief.
MrBrownstone · 46-50, M
A politician lied?? How rare.
CassandraFemale17 · 26-30, F
@MrBrownstone: trump could prevail in court due only to his position. NOT because he didn't libel Obama.

But it might backfire.

Those tweets alone could lead to impeachment.

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-03-06/trump-s-wiretap-tweets-raise-risk-of-impeachment
MrBrownstone · 46-50, M
@CassandraFemale17: So he's trolling you on twitter? Why do you all fall for it?
tenente · 100+, M
@CassandraFemale17: please start a new thread on impeachment. i would enjoy this discussion :)
Picklebobble2 · 56-60, M
You have to say, if that had been two celebs going at it. Or even a member of the public ! People would be screaming for a public apology at the very least. To say nothing of slander or libel law !
But given that we are talking about a man who would rather talk ANYTHING but policy, you have to wonder if it's something of a smokescreen to hide something.
Picklebobble2 · 56-60, M
We had an incident in the UK some years ago where it just happened to be a really bad news day.
I forget what it was but possibly something along the lines of international incidents coupled with the usual news fodder.
The press chief in the Prime Minister's office suggested releasing some bad news regarding a policy decision specifically on that day because (in his words) 'It's a good day to bury bad news !'
So i'd look carefully at law changes or qualifications for certain things that may have been pushed through quietly while this and the twitter fiasco continue.
CassandraFemale17 · 26-30, F
@Picklebobble2: 100% right

While the media is doing back flips for weeks over this, GOP State legislatures are busy removing voting rights from some of their own citizens, read poor and minority...with both traditionally voting Democrat.

Also the health care they are trying to push through is horrid for the sick, the elderly, and others. But in the meantime, they can chip away at Medicaid and Medicare without the health care package that is getting most of the attention.

Slimy people
Picklebobble2 · 56-60, M
I don't understand the medical thing.
People cost money. That's a fact every government knows.
But the U.S. goes round and around in circles with this issue.
And it's starting to look (from this side of the pond at least) as though it's something of a con every President plays in order to solicit money for their chosen insurance companies!
That's where your problem lies.
Looking after people is probably the one thing you will find it difficult to make a profit from !!
Oh for sure, I mean the FBI has N.E.V.E.R lied to the public before!
Ynotisay · M
Doesn't the "yeah but" argument ever strike you as being a little, I don't know, lame? You pretty much have to ignore the topic at hand to get there. I've never understood that kind of thinking.
Ynotisay · M
Obama is all about the high road because he knows those who take the low road end up imploding.
tenente · 100+, M
@Ynotisay: Obama is also a very savvy political scholar and former POTUS who knows the supreme court ruled "The President is entitled to absolute immunity from liability for damages based on his official acts" (102 S. Ct. 2690; 73 L. Ed. 2d 349; 1982 U.S. LEXIS 42; 50 U.S.L.W. 4797) making a civil decision in his favor to be unlikely. i'm disenchanted by trump, but this doesn't mean Obama will expend resources in a losing cause.
Ynotisay · M
@tenente: I'm not sure the poster REALLY thought Obama would sue. But, just to toss it out there, he COULD sue. That ruling, which involved Nixon, is related to "Official Acts." That's the gray area and there are arguments for both sides. It's not cut and dry. Obama wouldn't sue of course but that's not to say he couldn't.
tenente · 100+, M
@Ynotisay: you said it yourself (and i happen to agree) - 'high road'. Obama would not involve himself in mudslinging.
Now, as I recall Trump was the one who was talking about "opening up libel laws" when media, SNL, and various comedians were saying things about him that he didn't like. I don't know if he's since done so but Obama and a lot of other people could successfully sue him if they were so inclined.
You're right, though. If Barack Obama didn't waste time suing him for his "birther" claims, that were also a lie, he's not likely to waste time now. Just one more way in which Barack Obama is a better man than Trump will ever be.
CassandraFemale17 · 26-30, F
As sitting President, Obama would not likely have sued anyone. Sitting Presidents are sitting ducks basically for all kinds of theories, Trump included.

But this is a current President defaming a former President.

And current Presidents speak from a position of enormous power. One would think they have access to mountains of Intel before they speak.

Trump doesn't need Intel. He has Bannon, Breitbart, Fox, Hannity, and Jones.

What a freak show of a team!



I still wish though that Obama will sue. He was clearly maligned, and continues to be, as Trump refuses to back down on it.
SW-User
I hope he does
senghenydd · M
[image deleted]Bring George back
I actually thought of that BUT that would be on par to what Trump does.
... and then there's that "we go high when they go low" thing 🙄
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
tenente · 100+, M
i looked this up. the supreme court ruled (5-4) : the President is entitled to absolute immunity from liability for civil damages based on his official position. trump can do as he pleases (apparently).
CassandraFemale17 · 26-30, F
@Ynotisay: ohhhhhh, do explain...

Do you mean his saying it unofficially, like at 6:30 in the morning, when not officially speaking for the Goverment.....,means he could have to answer for it?

Or am I merely wishful thinking my interpretation into your post?
tenente · 100+, M
@Ynotisay: in this case - our supreme court would disagree with you: trump can lie about others. (it doesn't make it right - but this is the laws of our country. )
Ynotisay · M
@tenente: I wouldn't imagine it getting to the Supreme Court but he is not immune from all laws.
If interested, there's a solid article on Slate that explains the precedent and legal options.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2017/03/obama_could_sue_trump_for_libel.html

 
Post Comment