Donald Trump Probably Committed Murder - AND HE WILL GET AWAY WITH IT!

1. 86

   My Esotericposted 3 days ago

   SCOTUS Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson famously wrote in their dissent to Trump v United States that:
   
   “When the President] uses his official powers in any way, under the majority’s reasoning, he now will be insulated from criminal prosecution. Orders the Navy’s SEAL Team 6 to assassinate a political rival? Immune. Organizes a military coup to hold onto power? Immune. Takes a bribe in exchange for a pardon? Immune. Immune, immune, immune.”
   
   And
   
   “The relationship between the President and the people he serves has shifted irrevocably. In every use of official power, the President is now a king above the law.”
   
   they were just being glib - it has come to pass that a president can commit murder and not be held criminally accountable (and very possibly neither will his incompetent SecDef Pete Hegseth.
   
   It has been RELIABLY reported, first by the Washington Post and then confirmed by CNN that -
   
   The US military carried out a follow-up strike on a suspected drug vessel operating in the Caribbean on September 2 after an initial attack did not kill everyone on board!!!!!
   
   THAT IS MURDER BY ANYONE's STANDARDS except Trump and Hegseth.
   
   "While the first strike appeared to disable the boat and cause deaths, the military assessed there were survivors, according to the sources. The second attack killed the remaining crew on board, bringing the total death toll to 11, and sunk the ship." Another report says two survivors were seen "clinging to the wreckage".
   
   WHY did they go back and murder the survivors? Because they were following SecDef Pete Hegseth's orders - "The order was to KILL EVERYBODY" kill everybody” and to leave no survivors!!! - this according to two sources who heard the order.
   
   In total, the investigative reporting was based on interviews with at least 7 people that were familiar with what took place.
   
   The Senate has already started investigating and the House is supposed to follow suit.
   
   CAN TRUMP BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE? NO, not criminally anyway. He could be impeached, but it includes no Jail Time. Hegseth is in a better position because Trump can simply pardon him.
   
   Trump can't be held accountable because of the conservative SCOTUS decision to effectively make presidents "King(s) above the law". Being Commander in Chief is one of the "core presidential functions" that have full and complete immunity. That means, as the liberal justices presciently pointed out, Trump can commit actual murder and get away with it. - And now he most likely has.
   
   I hope, but doubt, that even MAUGA will find that unacceptable. Do you?

   replyreport
   1. 80

      wildernessposted 3 days agoin reply to this

      Can't see it matters - we are told that Trump caused the death ("murdered") tens of thousands of Americans during COVID.  What is another handful of drug runners?

      replyreport
      1. 86

         My Esotericposted 2 days agoin reply to this

         The intent.

         replyreport
         1. 80

            wildernessposted 2 days agoin reply to this

            Ah.  The intent is to save/protect thousands of American lives.  You are correct - he should absolutely be found guilty of murder for such an evil thing!

            replyreport
2. 86

   My Esotericposted 2 days ago

   More Republicans are chiming in about the Trump/Hegseth extrajudicial killings of survivors of their illegal bombings of supposed drug smugglers.
   
   https://www.cnn.com/2025/12/01/politics … s-pressure

   replyreport
3. 86

   My Esotericposted 45 hours ago

   Trump identifies Admiral who order the killing of the survivors of his first attack on a boat full of people in the Caribbean.
   
   "The White House said Monday that Adm. Frank M. “Mitch” Bradley, commander of the US Special Operations Command, was responsible for ordering a second, targeted strike on an alleged drug vessel operating in the Caribbean on September 2 after the first strike did not kill everyone aboard."
   
   Trump's mouthpiece says Bradley was "well within his authority". Only a deranged autocrat would think or say such a thing.
   
   The military should immediately begin an Article 32 investigation into the Admiral for murder as well as anyone who followed his orders.
   
   https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/ … 6ovuqudhnz

   replyreport
   1. 86

      My Esotericposted 44 hours agoin reply to this

      In George Washington's through Joe Biden's America, excluding the aberration from 2016 to 2021, The admiral and everyone up and down the chain would be investigated for murder as well as War Crimes.
      
      Based on Trump, we have an easy to follow fact pattern:
      
      1. What is probably an illegal order to sink a boatload of civilians (remember, we don't know that they were anything but that for sure and with this crowd on the Right, no intuition allowed) was carried out.
      
      2. Some reports say the boat was not sunk and two survivors were inside. Other reports say the boat was destroyed and the two survivors were clinging to wreckage.
      
      3. In either case, the admiral saw this and, possibly because of orders Hegseth gave earlier to leave no survivors or maybe on his own, the admiral ordered a second attack to assassinate the two survivors.
      
      4. They were killed.
      
      That is cut and dried, according to Trump and many others.
      
      Nobody, save for Trump and Hegseth, believe that this WAS NOT a War Crime and an act of Murder.
      
      So, how are you going to defend your hero now?

      replyreport
      1. 80

         wildernessposted 40 hours agoin reply to this

         Interesting that "Eso doesn't know something about the boatload of people" suddenly became "WE don't know something about the boatload of people".  Who is "We"?  The HP forum regulars?  The state dept.?  Trump?  Our intelligence dept?

         replyreport
         1. 86

            My Esotericposted 39 hours agoin reply to this

            Since you are the only one here, I decided to use your logic. We, the public.

            replyreport
            1. 80

               wildernessposted 26 hours agoin reply to this

               I understand.  You are upset that the public is not given access to all that our intelligence system comes up with.
               
               Personally, I'm not surprised at that, for it would not be "intelligence" then, just twisted, spun lies all over the internet.

               replyreport
               1. 81

                  Credence2posted 2 hours agoin reply to this

                  How do i know that Trump and his administration is not lying about the nature of the attacks on the fishing boats? Even Republican congressman are now making inquiries and want answers justifying Trumps actions. So, no, the President and his lackeys are not allowed to keep this information to themselves.

                  replyreport
                  1. 86

                     My Esotericposted 115 minutes agoin reply to this

                     As to what Wilderness said in his attempt to be sarcastic - when War Crimes are involved, enough (NOT ALL or even some AS CLAIMED) of that intel needs to come out to justify what are patently illegal operations.

                     replyreport
         2. 86

            My Esotericposted 39 hours agoin reply to this

            Also, it makes no difference at all who or what in those boats. Only those who don't believe in the rule of law or do believe the end justifies the means think what Trump has done is legal.

            replyreport
            1. 80

               wildernessposted 26 hours agoin reply to this

               Sorry - I find organized drug smugglers to be waging war on the US, and as such subject themselves to our military.
               
               Only one of the many boats sunk are questionable, and that is the one with two strikes.  Then the question becomes did we target the boat the second time or the men in the water?  You will say the men (without knowing) because it is against Trump, I will say I don't know.

               replyreport
               1. 86

                  peoplepower73posted 23 hours agoin reply to this

                  As they say all is fair in love and war.  The question is are we really at war? During WWII, thousands of civilians were killed on all sides. But we were on a real war footing, that was approved by congress.
                  
                  Since Korea, no U.S. war has been formally declared by Congress. Instead, presidents have relied on executive authority, UN resolutions, NATO commitments, or Authorizations for Use of Military Force (AUMFs). This has created a long-running constitutional struggle over war powers, with Congress often sidelined in practice.
                  
                  This is precisely what Trump is doing with Venezuela. It raises the questions does a war on drugs warrant an Armanda Strike Force off their coast with 15,000 troops at the ready, and a closed air space, or does Trump want regime change, so that he can take over the Venezuela oil fields or both?

                  replyreport
                  1. 80

                     wildernessposted 21 hours agoin reply to this

                     Sounds like what was done in Vietnam, in Kuwait, in Iraq and in Afghanistan.  The "war on terror" is another one.  But in any case, we certainly do not need a UN resolution to wage war, nor one from NATO. 
                     
                     Trump is thus following in some big footsteps, isn't he?  I hope he can fill them!
                     
                     Those with TDS will assume Trump wants a regime change so he can annex Venezuela into the US and gain its oil, the MAGA group will assume he is after drug runners.  And I...I am in the middle without any assumptions to give.

                     replyreport
               2. 86

                  My Esotericposted 14 hours agoin reply to this

                  That is certainly your opinion and while it might make sense to you, but legally it does not.   TheShadowSpecter wrote:
                  This is what fascism looks like?  James Comey is the biggest fascist there is.  He's another one of those FBI freaks who got booted out of his position as the FBI director for malfeasance.  I couldn't see anyone with a brain hiring him even to walk their dog at this point in time.
                  
                  ROFL. Thanks for the sarcasm.
                  
                  replypermalinkreport
                  TheShadowSpecter profile image68TheShadowSpecterposted 8 hours ago
                  My Esoteric wrote:
                  ROFL. Thanks for the sarcasm.
                  
                  I'm actually serious.  I'm sick and tired of the lower-level FBI employees being treated so horribly while the big shots in the FBI practically can get away with murder.  What the FBI higher-ups did to Coleen Rowley and Sibel Edmunds was disgraceful.  They took most of Coleen Rowley's retirement away and they wrongfully terminated Sibel Edmunds merely because these women did the right thing and reported corruption within the agency.  It makes absolutely no sense to me that James Comey got to keep his security clearance after he was fired from the FBI.  I know I sound angry, but I've known a lot of people who have worked for the FBI and they have told me some horror stories about how the lower-level employees get treated so despicably while the big shots get away with everything and are coddled by the system even when they get fired.  It's mind-boggling.
                  
                  If Donald J. Trump had never been president, there would likely still have been bad things coming out about James Comey.  And he probably still would have been fired under a Democratic presidential administration.  It just would have taken a little longer to happen probably, but it would have happened. allow a President to blow up boats in international waters unless they pose an immediate and imminent threat to the United States,
                  
                  Even if there were drug runners on board carrying drugs, the ONLY thing Trump is allowed to do is stop and board them - period.
                  
                  If you know otherwise, please provide the statutes that says he can.
                  
                  There is even less doubt that ordering or carrying out an attack on helpless civilians clinging to wreckage in the water goes beyond the pale. If true, and Trump says it is, that by definition is  a War Crime.
                  
                  As to if it has happened other times, how do we know? We certainly can't take the word of pathological liars can we.
                  
                  Do you think it was possible there were women in the water and in any case, I am not sure what that has to do with anything. Multiple sources say there were and I believe them - why else go back?
                  
                  And why aren't you looking for the heads of the real problem - the users in America that create the demand the others satisfy. You guys act like the cartels are coming over here with needles in their hands, knocking out innocent people and putting the drugs in their arms.
                  
                  You know as well as I that so long as their is a demand, it will get filled.

                  replyreport
4. 86

   My Esotericposted 27 hours ago

   Pete "no survivors" Hegseth is starting to set Adm Bradley up as the fall guy to the murder of unarmed, civilian survivors.
   
   [b]"Hegseth shifts responsibility for double-tap strike, says he stands by commander's military decisions"
   
   "Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said Monday he stands by Adm. Frank “Mitch” Bradley and the “combat decisions he has made” in regard to US strikes on alleged drug boats, appearing to shift primarily responsibility for those strikes to the military commander overseeing them.
   
   “Let’s make one thing crystal clear: Admiral Mitch Bradley is an American hero, a true professional, and has my 100% support. I stand by him and the combat decisions he has made — on the September 2 mission and all others since,” Hegseth said in a post on X.
   
   Some context: Hegseth’s post comes just hours after the White House also pointed to Bradley, who is commander of US Special Operations Command, as the official who ordered the second strike on a suspected drug boat in September in the Caribbean. The strike on September 2 was the first in a string of attacks that have since killed more than 80 people. CNN has reported that the military carried out the additional strike on September 2 after the first did not kill everyone on board.
   
   “On September 2, Secretary Hegseth authorized Adm. Bradley to conduct these kinetic strikes,” White House spokesperson Karoline Leavitt said on Monday. “Adm. Bradley worked well within his authority and the law directing the engagement to ensure the boat was destroyed and the threat to the United States of America was eliminated.”
   
   Hegseth’s role in the “double-tap” strike has received immense scrutiny from lawmakers on both sides of the aisle and military legal experts who have raised concerns over the legality of the strike and the potential of war crimes."
   
   https://www.cnn.com/2025/12/02/politics … ike-maduro

   replyreport
5. 81

   Credence2posted 2 hours ago

   Cowardice and piracy on the high seas? The case is being made that Hegseth is a brutish clown and has to go…….
   
   
   https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/2025/ … aign=share

   replyreport
   1. 86

      My Esotericposted 118 minutes agoin reply to this

      Hegseth needed to go when he started spilling state secrets on Signal.

      replyreport