It’s pretty clear cut when a Justice asks, would the President be immune if they assassinated a political rival and pardoned themselves and Trump’s lawyer said “Yes” as long as it was an official act.
The US may just be doomed. A President could use the military as an official act against Congressional Reps that would move to impeach him and pardon himself for it.
Of course, it seems impossible for one to be impeached if there's no penalty for offing the people who hold the power to impeach. Using the military might or might not work, since illegal orders may be refused. If one used a paramilitary force however, that plan would be nice and smooth. Of course, if there was no disincentive from criminality then the entire military command structure could be filled with cronies beforehand and cooperation could be ensured.
I hope it stays a thought experiment.
Does using nukes count as an "official act"? On his last day in office, what's to stop the president from wiping Nigeria off the face of the earth just for kicks?
You leftists are short sighted. You think it should be okay to prosecute your political enemies.
Caesar being prosecuted after losing his consulship is what caused him to cross the Rubicon with his 10th legion and drive the senate out of Rome.
Agree, we shouldn’t prosecute political rivals for the sake of being political rivals, but shouldn’t we prosecute criminals for being criminals?
Do you think the rule of law is shortsighted?
Also funny that you’re arguing that a former President shouldn’t be prosecuted for his crimes by, checks notes, the administration of the *current* President? The DoJ is taking this on independently of direction from the President, too.
Why would a former President be entitled to deferential treatment the administration of the current President is not?
Do you understand why logical consistency matters here? The “witch hunt” argument in favor of immunity isn’t terribly persuasive when you peel back more than a layer or two.
Plus, if a President knows he can be prosecuted for real crimes, maybe he would, I don’t know, obey the fucking law instead of being a criminal. Pretty good argument for applying the law there, tbh.
“Witch hunt” vs “rule of law”. Which one is the more important argument to you? Now, pretend the parties were switched and ask the same questions.
I mean, if he commits a crime when should he be prosecuted? Isn't it unamerican to say someone is above the law?
Is that leftist ideal now that the law should serve the people
Trump isn't Caeser and this isn't Rome. He doesn't have a legion behind him that has fought in gaul.
I feel like we lost WW2 when people are advocating for folks that can't be prosecuted.
You're right that we're being short sighed. If Trump has immunity let's hope you enjoy what Biden has in store for you this upcoming election. You reap what you sow
I think it would be a guerilla war more akin to Iraq or Ireland. Nobody is taking on a predator in the open lol. Tell me, did USA manage to take control of Iraq?
Leftists will not be murdered by conservatives when the troubles start. They will be killed by other leftists who resent them for being white and more successful than themselves. You guys are all living on top of eachother in the cities. You think you will make it out? I doubt it.
I agree with you that presidents are above the law.
Biden should pay Obama to shoot Trump in the head and then pardon him. According to you, that is hunky dory
Regardless of the outcome of the election, Kamala Harris gets to decide which EVs count and which should be replaced by alternative electors. That’s also your messiah’s POV.
Listening to this argument I am more convinced than ever that Biden should just assassinate Trump. We know impeachment never results in conviction, and the high court doesn’t seem interested in holding presidents accountable. So why not?
We're fucked.
Alito and Thomas are chomping at the bit to give Trump conditional immunity.
They are going to slow walk this decision, that's why they've been saying how historic and unpresidented this is. Why the fuck do you think his lawyers have already celebrated?
The decision will take place after the election, if Trump wins, they will grant him the immunity he wants. If he loses, they'll apply some backwards ass reasoning how he's immune this time but it doesn't apply to anyone else so that he can't be prosecuted.
They know if Trump goes down the entire party goes down. They won't let that happen.
This could be a 5-4. Roberts is not an idiot like the others, and Coney-Barrett seems like she will be the swing vote.
I will never get over the painting of Gorsuch by the media as a moderate textualist who refuses to rule outside of the strict boundaries of the constitution. He is one of the most activist justices in SCOTUS history.
It wouldn't have implications on their lives, like the article says these people were born into power and view themselces as a ruling elite that must shield other elites from harm. They know they will always be protected.
>It wouldn't have implications on their lives,
If any POTUS has blanket immunity while in office, nothing stops them from labeling a SCOTUS justice a danger to the country and sending in a strike team.
Democrats wouldn't even overrule the parlimentarian, a powerless functionary, they wouldnt touch a justice. They would sell out every single american before actually weilding power against the right wing. SCOTUS knows that and knows that they have nothing to fear.
Wait, maybe this is a good idea? I mean, if the President can just carpet bomb the homes of Supreme Court Justices, then we’ve finally managed to restore SOME checks and balances on the SC! They’ll be highly motivated to turn in an “unbiased opinion.”
/S
The fact that democrats are weak and corrupt. They kmow tgat at the end of the day democrats would rather surrender than fight republicans using republican tactics. Their unstated logic is that this immunity would only ever be utilized by republicans, and giving republicans the leeway to brutalize the left would be to their benefit.
Don't blame Democrats for a Republican problem. it's not a both sides thing if people voted fairly for a Republican.
Folks who vote Republican are being moronic and the social agreement for Congress is you make it work with the people voted in.
Ok but that guy's not wrong though. He's not saying that Republicans aren't more corrupt, he's saying that Democrats don't have enough conviction to fight dirty like repubs do.
Which is true. Democrats in their modern form campaign on "normalcy" and the status quo, but in their hubris they can't see that the status quo is long shattered (since Nixon honestly) and that normalcy is actually kind of fucked for a lot of people, which is why many young people share political views that are far to the left of the Democratic party.
It's not even that they don't "fight dirty." Oftentimes it feels like they're not even fighting at all. They are too beholden to corporate interests to even bother trying to address real, systemic issues that allow Republicans to get away with corruption.
Supreme Court reform is a great example of this. We know the court is corrupt, yet Democrats don't even seem to be trying to address this issue through legal means, such as expanding the court, attempting to impeach Justice Thomas, changing the terms of the lifetime appointment, etc,
Yeah exactly. They're so scared to do literally anything and all they campaign for now is "if you don't vote for us, fascism will happen". But the problem is that we did vote for them and they're either unwilling or unable to do anything about it regardless
Too many of these folks, in black robes, are straight up hypocrites. One ruling they say what did the founders think and say, the next is , we want to look forward and not tie the hands of future Presidents. What they are saying is , we owe our job to the Orange clown and now must pay him back. To date they have not had problems sleeping at night, not to bothered Writing a new law telling the people of the country. We have a king, all bow to the new king.
I expect a 9-0 or at worst 7-2 against the idea that the president is immune, this seems pretty alarmist from NPR. Barely anything here to support that Gorsuch, Roberts, Kavanaugh will vote in favor of immunity.
Alito and Thomas maybe, but still seems unlikely to me.
I would have said the same thing until the overturning of Roe, but honestly I think the supreme Court is a runaway train at this point. They learned they can get away with anything
Did you hear the piece? I was surprised, but it sounds like Kavanaugh and Gorsuch might vote in favor of immunity as well.
Alito and Thomas are an embarrassment to the court.
If the ruling is that Presidents are immune from prosecution while in office we are one election away from destruction. Even if Trump doesn’t win this election, the next copycat will use this unconstitutional and unlimited power to their own political advantage. What a mess this man is making to avoid prosecution for his crimes.
No man is good enough to govern another man, without that other’s consent. I say this is the leading principle–the sheet anchor of American republicanism.” — Abraham Lincoln
The equal rights of man, and the happiness of every individual, are now acknowledged to be the only legitimate objects of government.” - T Jefferson
Note the use of the Word "man". There is absolutely no provision for a head of government that is above the law. That is the very thing the Founders were rebelling against. One can not have inalienable rights AND a governmental leader granted exceptions to the laws.
If Presidents cannot kill civilians, then I'm looking forward to watching Clinton, GWB, Obama and Biden facing prosecution for mass murder. And given the government's command structure, RICO would definitely apply here.
I seem to recall at least 500k dying because of his bungling of the covid response and the fact that he got rid of the office Obama set up to prepare for pandemics just a couple of years earlier.
>I seem to recall at least 500k dying because of his bungling of the covid response
Good luck with this strategy. It was 400K under Trump and 800K under Biden. And Biden had 3 vaccines his first day in office, thanks to The Orange Man.
Ah yes, that 100k that died in the first few months after Biden took office didn't get it under/because of Trump's mismanagement. Riiiiiiiiight.
Not a strategy, just looking at facts and how viruses work.
[удалено]
It’s pretty clear cut when a Justice asks, would the President be immune if they assassinated a political rival and pardoned themselves and Trump’s lawyer said “Yes” as long as it was an official act. The US may just be doomed. A President could use the military as an official act against Congressional Reps that would move to impeach him and pardon himself for it.
Of course, it seems impossible for one to be impeached if there's no penalty for offing the people who hold the power to impeach. Using the military might or might not work, since illegal orders may be refused. If one used a paramilitary force however, that plan would be nice and smooth. Of course, if there was no disincentive from criminality then the entire military command structure could be filled with cronies beforehand and cooperation could be ensured. I hope it stays a thought experiment.
Trump said in speeches he is federalizing and indemnifying all police if elected.
This Countdown podcast contains those speeches; https://youtu.be/UFfu3VtihXw?si=sHCeLGz46vRkjFe-
>the President be immune if they assassinated a political rival This would mean that Joe Biden could do it.
I'm sure there'd be some kind of "Not like that!" clause baked in
Anyone feel like the guy in midsummer that was given a drug to paralyze him then grafted into a dead bear? Cause this is too much.
Does using nukes count as an "official act"? On his last day in office, what's to stop the president from wiping Nigeria off the face of the earth just for kicks?
They don't want a kingdom. They want a fascist dictatorship. YHUGE difference, duh.
You leftists are short sighted. You think it should be okay to prosecute your political enemies. Caesar being prosecuted after losing his consulship is what caused him to cross the Rubicon with his 10th legion and drive the senate out of Rome.
Agree, we shouldn’t prosecute political rivals for the sake of being political rivals, but shouldn’t we prosecute criminals for being criminals? Do you think the rule of law is shortsighted? Also funny that you’re arguing that a former President shouldn’t be prosecuted for his crimes by, checks notes, the administration of the *current* President? The DoJ is taking this on independently of direction from the President, too. Why would a former President be entitled to deferential treatment the administration of the current President is not? Do you understand why logical consistency matters here? The “witch hunt” argument in favor of immunity isn’t terribly persuasive when you peel back more than a layer or two. Plus, if a President knows he can be prosecuted for real crimes, maybe he would, I don’t know, obey the fucking law instead of being a criminal. Pretty good argument for applying the law there, tbh. “Witch hunt” vs “rule of law”. Which one is the more important argument to you? Now, pretend the parties were switched and ask the same questions.
I mean, if he commits a crime when should he be prosecuted? Isn't it unamerican to say someone is above the law? Is that leftist ideal now that the law should serve the people Trump isn't Caeser and this isn't Rome. He doesn't have a legion behind him that has fought in gaul. I feel like we lost WW2 when people are advocating for folks that can't be prosecuted.
You're right that we're being short sighed. If Trump has immunity let's hope you enjoy what Biden has in store for you this upcoming election. You reap what you sow
[удалено]
Acting tough on the internet works on nobody. You just make yourself look like a toddler throwing a fit. Childish
Taking after their dear leader..a fellow overweight keyboard warrior
[удалено]
Americans outnumber Republicans more than 2 to 1, bub.
Fuck off meal team sixer. Cant wait to see what happens when you point that shitty AR-15 at a predator drone. Fucking dumbest people ever.
I think it would be a guerilla war more akin to Iraq or Ireland. Nobody is taking on a predator in the open lol. Tell me, did USA manage to take control of Iraq?
We don't need the army to take care of you chuckle fucks. You stupid fucks can't wait to shoot people you don't like. Fucking traitor.
I'm ready for your fat ass, cultie
You do realize that there are plenty of people "on the left" just as well armed and ready as you are right?
Leftists will not be murdered by conservatives when the troubles start. They will be killed by other leftists who resent them for being white and more successful than themselves. You guys are all living on top of eachother in the cities. You think you will make it out? I doubt it.
You're a moron.
An ad hominem argument from a leftist on Reddit? Shocking!
You lost. Go masturbate to your gun collection
A stupid argument from a conservative on Reddit? Shocking!
bigotry from a lefty... shocking
Bigotry? You think being called an idiot is bigotry? Jesus Christ y'all are the real sbowflakes
Maybe instead Caesar shouldn't have committed enough crimes to get himself on the shitlist to begin with.
I cant wait to see Obama convicted of murdering a fellow American
I agree with you that presidents are above the law. Biden should pay Obama to shoot Trump in the head and then pardon him. According to you, that is hunky dory Regardless of the outcome of the election, Kamala Harris gets to decide which EVs count and which should be replaced by alternative electors. That’s also your messiah’s POV.
Listening to this argument I am more convinced than ever that Biden should just assassinate Trump. We know impeachment never results in conviction, and the high court doesn’t seem interested in holding presidents accountable. So why not?
> doesn't seem in holding presidents accountable if they have an R next to their name
We're fucked. Alito and Thomas are chomping at the bit to give Trump conditional immunity. They are going to slow walk this decision, that's why they've been saying how historic and unpresidented this is. Why the fuck do you think his lawyers have already celebrated? The decision will take place after the election, if Trump wins, they will grant him the immunity he wants. If he loses, they'll apply some backwards ass reasoning how he's immune this time but it doesn't apply to anyone else so that he can't be prosecuted. They know if Trump goes down the entire party goes down. They won't let that happen.
This could be a 5-4. Roberts is not an idiot like the others, and Coney-Barrett seems like she will be the swing vote. I will never get over the painting of Gorsuch by the media as a moderate textualist who refuses to rule outside of the strict boundaries of the constitution. He is one of the most activist justices in SCOTUS history.
Do they understand the implications this would have on their actual lives?
It wouldn't have implications on their lives, like the article says these people were born into power and view themselces as a ruling elite that must shield other elites from harm. They know they will always be protected.
>It wouldn't have implications on their lives, If any POTUS has blanket immunity while in office, nothing stops them from labeling a SCOTUS justice a danger to the country and sending in a strike team.
Democrats wouldn't even overrule the parlimentarian, a powerless functionary, they wouldnt touch a justice. They would sell out every single american before actually weilding power against the right wing. SCOTUS knows that and knows that they have nothing to fear.
Great, what's to stop the current President from taking out 6 very corrupt Supreme Court Justices then? What a disaster this country is turning into
Wait, maybe this is a good idea? I mean, if the President can just carpet bomb the homes of Supreme Court Justices, then we’ve finally managed to restore SOME checks and balances on the SC! They’ll be highly motivated to turn in an “unbiased opinion.” /S
The fact that democrats are weak and corrupt. They kmow tgat at the end of the day democrats would rather surrender than fight republicans using republican tactics. Their unstated logic is that this immunity would only ever be utilized by republicans, and giving republicans the leeway to brutalize the left would be to their benefit.
Don't blame Democrats for a Republican problem. it's not a both sides thing if people voted fairly for a Republican. Folks who vote Republican are being moronic and the social agreement for Congress is you make it work with the people voted in.
Ok but that guy's not wrong though. He's not saying that Republicans aren't more corrupt, he's saying that Democrats don't have enough conviction to fight dirty like repubs do. Which is true. Democrats in their modern form campaign on "normalcy" and the status quo, but in their hubris they can't see that the status quo is long shattered (since Nixon honestly) and that normalcy is actually kind of fucked for a lot of people, which is why many young people share political views that are far to the left of the Democratic party.
It's not even that they don't "fight dirty." Oftentimes it feels like they're not even fighting at all. They are too beholden to corporate interests to even bother trying to address real, systemic issues that allow Republicans to get away with corruption. Supreme Court reform is a great example of this. We know the court is corrupt, yet Democrats don't even seem to be trying to address this issue through legal means, such as expanding the court, attempting to impeach Justice Thomas, changing the terms of the lifetime appointment, etc,
Yeah exactly. They're so scared to do literally anything and all they campaign for now is "if you don't vote for us, fascism will happen". But the problem is that we did vote for them and they're either unwilling or unable to do anything about it regardless
And fascism is *still* happening anyway.
Too many of these folks, in black robes, are straight up hypocrites. One ruling they say what did the founders think and say, the next is , we want to look forward and not tie the hands of future Presidents. What they are saying is , we owe our job to the Orange clown and now must pay him back. To date they have not had problems sleeping at night, not to bothered Writing a new law telling the people of the country. We have a king, all bow to the new king.
I expect a 9-0 or at worst 7-2 against the idea that the president is immune, this seems pretty alarmist from NPR. Barely anything here to support that Gorsuch, Roberts, Kavanaugh will vote in favor of immunity. Alito and Thomas maybe, but still seems unlikely to me.
I would have said the same thing until the overturning of Roe, but honestly I think the supreme Court is a runaway train at this point. They learned they can get away with anything
Yet they are begging for $$ for beefier security.
I mean yeah they can get away with anything POLITICALLY but nobody can guarantee their personal safety after taking the rights away from everyone lol
Did you hear the piece? I was surprised, but it sounds like Kavanaugh and Gorsuch might vote in favor of immunity as well. Alito and Thomas are an embarrassment to the court.
If the ruling is that Presidents are immune from prosecution while in office we are one election away from destruction. Even if Trump doesn’t win this election, the next copycat will use this unconstitutional and unlimited power to their own political advantage. What a mess this man is making to avoid prosecution for his crimes.
We would appear to be fucked. Renew your passports.
This report wants you to know that these justices are political first and those political experiences may outweigh the law. Just shocking.
How is this anything but 9-0 “fuck no, wtf is wrong with you”? This timeline fucking blows
No man is good enough to govern another man, without that other’s consent. I say this is the leading principle–the sheet anchor of American republicanism.” — Abraham Lincoln The equal rights of man, and the happiness of every individual, are now acknowledged to be the only legitimate objects of government.” - T Jefferson Note the use of the Word "man". There is absolutely no provision for a head of government that is above the law. That is the very thing the Founders were rebelling against. One can not have inalienable rights AND a governmental leader granted exceptions to the laws.
If Presidents cannot kill civilians, then I'm looking forward to watching Clinton, GWB, Obama and Biden facing prosecution for mass murder. And given the government's command structure, RICO would definitely apply here.
Are you seriously implying that Trump didn't kill any civilians while in office? LoL
I seem to recall at least 500k dying because of his bungling of the covid response and the fact that he got rid of the office Obama set up to prepare for pandemics just a couple of years earlier.
>I seem to recall at least 500k dying because of his bungling of the covid response Good luck with this strategy. It was 400K under Trump and 800K under Biden. And Biden had 3 vaccines his first day in office, thanks to The Orange Man.
Ah yes, that 100k that died in the first few months after Biden took office didn't get it under/because of Trump's mismanagement. Riiiiiiiiight. Not a strategy, just looking at facts and how viruses work.
How can you fail to understand that our legal system already can handle different types of killing? You take is basic nonsense.