Author Information
Hit me with your best shot
Headline in today's N.Y. Times:
'How a Supreme Court Immunity Ruling Could Affect Trump's Election Case'
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/26/us/politics/trump-supreme-court-immunity.html
Donald Trump is seeking immunity from the criminal charges he's facing.
The Supreme Court is currently hearing the case. What do I think?
I have mixed feelings. On the one hand, I say no. Why should Donald Trump be granted immunity for his alleged actions? If you or I did what he allegedly did, would we be granted immunity? I don't think so. What happened to equal treatment under the law?
On the other hand, maybe he should be granted immunity. I hesitate to tell you why I think that. Let me just say it's a crime to threaten the life of a President, former President, or a Presidential candidate and I'm not going to take that risk.
Confused? Let me explain using an analogy. I live in NYC. If you have a child and you want to enroll your child in the NYC school system, you must show proof of immunization from DTaP (diptheria-tetanus-pertussis), poliovirus, MMR (measles-mumps-rubella), varicella and hepatitis B.
If you're not RFK Jr, I would say most people have no problem having a child vaccinated to prevent these viruses. And what method is primarily used to vaccinate? It's done by an injection. Yes. If someone should ask you 'Has your child been vaccinated?' You would likely say 'Yes, my child has received all the shots necessary. They have received immunity from the viruses listed above'.
Donald Trump is looking for immunity. I would say give it to him, but as I mentioned I don't want to be arrested. I guess I could say this. To receive immunity against the viruses listed would require a few shots. Trump should require only one.
