Trump
Biden
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4gvd7kxxj5o
Hooray! The president can do what the fuck he likes.
You have no knowledge of that trial beyond what the BBC told you, which means you have no knowledge of that trial. For the law to be credible it must have standards that are applied evenly and in line with spirit and guided by the letter. Ironic then you should be castigating the victim of unlawful action and claiming it is he who ignores the spirit and the letter of the law. In ALL of these cases the law had to be catastrophically twisted to even craft a case. And then the judges had to close their eyes to the law in order to bring that same law to bear on their political enemy. I suspect you know this, or sense it. But it is politically inexpedient for you to tell the truth.
Für eure Sicherheit
You should also recall, unless you have been relying on the BBC, Biden was actually found guilty of the very charges they levied against Trump, Biden being a vice-president and Trump being a President (and there is your law as stated in black and white - or did the BBC not go into detail?) But the law was ignored in Biden's case because the prosecutor saw no justice in pursuing a feeble man. I actually agree with that ruling, not that it prevents me believing Biden should have been convicted for countless other serious crimes (real crimes, not Trump crimes) in the past decades. What I find strange is the corruption that accepts the will of the court and the enfeeblement of their puppet, yet retains that puppet to play the role of "most powerful leader" in the free world. You can't have both, can you? Or maybe you can - what does the BBC have to say about it's own - what shall we call it? - cognitive dissonance (perfect example right there for you, now you know the definition).
Für eure Sicherheit