MarSolo Posted July 1 Share Posted July 1 So which Trump crimes are now immune? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chakoo Posted July 1 Share Posted July 1 Fuck the courts. If dems win they should fuck them over in kind (aka pack them). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hellhound Posted July 1 Share Posted July 1 It’s almost like if the president declares a subclass of people a “threat” to the country and rounds them up for confinement and after a show trial execution, that it could be an “official” act because he believed them to be a danger. And if his party controls the legislative and judicial branches good luck making it not so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commissar SFLUFAN Posted July 1 Share Posted July 1 2 minutes ago, MarSolo said: So which Trump crimes are now immune? Yes. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hellhound Posted July 1 Share Posted July 1 What is to stop a president now from issuing an executive order that migrant border crossers are now to be shot on sight to end the “invasion”? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commissar SFLUFAN Posted July 1 Share Posted July 1 3 minutes ago, Hellhound said: What is to stop a president now from issuing an executive order that migrant border crossers are now to be shot on sight to end the “invasion”? Absolutely nothing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b_m_b_m_b_m Posted July 1 Share Posted July 1 But remember the president doesn’t have the authority to forgive student loans despite clear language in the statute lmao Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b_m_b_m_b_m Posted July 1 Share Posted July 1 It would be really really fun if the assets of these justices were frozen because of “totally legitimate” bribery and potentially money laundering and falsifying records accusations or investigations Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b_m_b_m_b_m Posted July 1 Share Posted July 1 Is ignoring contempt of court or congress on the table? In the name of an official act why not!? btw good luck finding out what’s official and what’s not Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haya Dune Posted July 1 Share Posted July 1 Biden better do domething now. He has the immunity. Use it. Throw Trump in prison for treason and let the courts try to figure it out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CitizenVectron Posted July 1 Share Posted July 1 From Sotomayor's dissent: Quote Even if these nightmare scenarios never play out, and I pray they never do, the damage has been done. 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. Quote 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. She ended the dissent without the usual respectful language: Quote With fear for our democracy, I dissent. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CitizenVectron Posted July 1 Share Posted July 1 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CitizenVectron Posted July 1 Share Posted July 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kal-El814 Posted July 1 Share Posted July 1 Executive order to prohibit convicted felons from being eligible for the Presidency? Officially and whatnot so it’s very legal, very cool? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperSpreader Posted July 1 Share Posted July 1 1 minute ago, Kal-El814 said: Executive order to prohibit convicted felons from being eligible for the Presidency? Officially and whatnot so it’s very legal, very cool? Ooooo i like it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CitizenVectron Posted July 1 Share Posted July 1 2 minutes ago, Kal-El814 said: Executive order to prohibit convicted felons from being eligible for the Presidency? Officially and whatnot so it’s very legal, very cool? All this ruling does is allow the President to make orders and do whatever they want, and have protection. People need to still follow those orders. It would be very hard to order someone not to be allowed to be President. How would that be enforced? You'd need the cooperation of basically everyone. It's easier to just order loyal Secret Service agents to kill them, and then pardon the agents. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CitizenVectron Posted July 1 Share Posted July 1 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mclumber1 Posted July 1 Share Posted July 1 3 minutes ago, CitizenVectron said: All this ruling does is allow the President to make orders and do whatever they want, and have protection. People need to still follow those orders. It would be very hard to order someone not to be allowed to be President. How would that be enforced? You'd need the cooperation of basically everyone. It's easier to just order loyal Secret Service agents to kill them, and then pardon the agents. Plus, the President has no authority over how states conduct their elections Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chairslinger Posted July 1 Share Posted July 1 This ruling immediately reminded me of how twisted the law has become surrounding police use of force. How "I feared for my life" has become magic words that shield a cop from almost everything. All that matters is how the cop "felt" at the time. It makes me wonder, as bad as this ruling is, does it say anything about the inevitable claim that "the president thought it was an official act when they did it"? Because that feels like that is the next obvious move to eliminate even the marginal guardrails this ruling leaves in place.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xbob42 Posted July 1 Share Posted July 1 If we had a cool president, this would end in a hilariously ironic way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mclumber1 Posted July 1 Share Posted July 1 If there ever is another Constitutional Convention, I would argue that an amendment should be passed that clarifies that all acts a President takes, whether official or unofficial, must be lawful. If a former president is charged with a crime, they can offer up an affirmative defense as to why they carried out a certain action - IE they are charged with murder after they shoot down a 737 that was about to crash into the Sears Tower. It was clearly an official act - and the President can argue they did so out of necessity in order to prevent further loss of life in the tower or on the ground below the building. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ort Posted July 1 Share Posted July 1 40 minutes ago, CitizenVectron said: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted July 1 Author Share Posted July 1 The ruling also says a president can coordinate prosecutions with the DOJ. So time to fire Garland and put in someone who'll coordinate with the president on putting Trump in a black site. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b_m_b_m_b_m Posted July 1 Share Posted July 1 Biden should just do what Trump did in 2020 but with none of the mob rushing the capital building and it would 100% pass muster Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ominous Posted July 1 Share Posted July 1 Is telling your supporters to fight like hell an official act of an outgoing president? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finaljedi Posted July 1 Share Posted July 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commissar SFLUFAN Posted July 1 Share Posted July 1 17 minutes ago, finaljedi said: Somewhere in Hell, Nixon is gloating, "See? I told you so!" 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spork3245 Posted July 1 Share Posted July 1 21 minutes ago, Commissar SFLUFAN said: Somewhere in Hell, Nixon is gloating, "See? I told you so!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commissar SFLUFAN Posted July 1 Share Posted July 1 The Supreme Court just essentially answered the age old "Is the United States a republic or a democracy?" question by ruling that it's effectively neither. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dodger Posted July 1 Share Posted July 1 So what’s the actual implication of this, Trump won’t be prosecuted for crimes… he was never going to be prosecuted for to begin with? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commissar SFLUFAN Posted July 1 Share Posted July 1 2 minutes ago, Dodger said: So what’s the actual implication of this, Trump won’t be prosecuted for crimes… he was never going to be prosecuted for to begin with? It goes far beyond that. It essentially says that presidents have "presumptive" immunity for their official actions without providing any significant guidance as to what constitutes "official" versus "private" acts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siebzehn Posted July 1 Share Posted July 1 12 minutes ago, Dodger said: So what’s the actual implication of this, Trump won’t be prosecuted for crimes… he was never going to be prosecuted for to begin with? Well Sotomayor in her dissent had this to say, seems pretty practical: Quote When he 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 ex- change for a pardon? Immune. Immune, immune, immune 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dodger Posted July 1 Share Posted July 1 Yeah none of that is going to happen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaladinSolo Posted July 1 Share Posted July 1 12 minutes ago, Commissar SFLUFAN said: It goes far beyond that. It essentially says that presidents have "presumptive" immunity for their official actions without providing any significant guidance as to what constitutes "official" versus "private" acts. Well barret does somewhat lay out an example of Trump specifically not actin officially, but it also does rely on non corrupt judges. I do have a hard time seeing Trump avoiding prosecution if he loses the election. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Firewithin Posted July 1 Share Posted July 1 6 minutes ago, Dodger said: Yeah none of that is going to happen you sweet summer child 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.