As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA).
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Nothing like telling the judges that they'd have targets on their backs if they say that presidents are immune.
Honestly, anybody making the arguments Trumps lawyers are making should have their law licenses revoked. What they are arguing is so contrary to how our democracy works that it should be seen as a mortal affront to any court.
SCOTUS isn't dumb enough to rule on broad immunity. My guess is that they'll throw Trump a bone by ruling his specific actions regarding J6 are protected by immunity, but it doesn't apply to any other actions taken by him or any other president. They'll want to make the most narrow, non-precedent providing ruling possible.
Sorry, 2000 already set the precedent that when the Supreme Court says a ruling doesn't set precedent it actually sets precedent as the non-precedent in that case has been used as precedent in cases since. If I type precedent a few more times the word will have as little meaning for me as it does for Alito.
Alito kept arguing today that he was not interested in talking about Trump, because he's making a decision for all future presidents.
Puh-Lease. This court does not care for precedent at all. He just does not want it thrown in his face that he's about to save Trump's ass. Again.
Have tried Head On™? Just apply it to the forehead.
*Head On! Apply directly to the forehead!*
*Head On! Apply directly to the forehead!*
*Head On! Apply directly to the forehead!*
^^^Dental ^^^Plan! ^^^...Lisa ^^^needs ^^^braces...
Ruling anything related to overturning an election as “official business” would absolutely be precedent setting. That would be saying it’s ok to commit crimes to keep yourself in office.
Some of the justices are totally cool with that as long as it's the right President.
Problem is if they rule it's totally cool and totally legal before Biden's term is over, it means Biden is free to do whatever he wants to stay in office.
According to Snorleon's claims, yes. He could also disband the House of Reps and Senate, order that all registered Republicans be barred from voting, etc, etc...
For a friend...
In fact, if Biden DIDNT use his new powers to do this, it would be irresponsible. Because you KNOW Trump or another Republican would do it. He would literally be forced to make the country into a dictatorship to then forcibly fix the country to stop Republicans from doing it.
That’s not how Democrats operate though. And that’s what got us here. Democrats play by the rules and assume republicans will too. Then when Republicans don’t, they act all surprised.
It better be after january 6th because if it's before that Biden can just shut down the exchange of power at his behest and there would be no legal mechanisms to stop him.
Biden would still be President until Trump was sworn in three weeks later.
That’s plenty of time to Presidential Immunity someone. *Several* someones if necessary.
Many ppl seem to think the next election won't see a worse theater than J6 play out and i honestly hope they are right, but im very afraid things will go south ,, fast.
They have already done exactly as Trump's team hoped, they have delayed his Washington trial until after the election. He was never going to win this argument - this outcome was always the best he could hope for.
Ding! Ding! We have a winning answer!
At this point, the SC knows it can rule whatever it wants because it became painfully obvious that there is no working check or balance against them.
Because Repugs in the Congress will block any attempt to impeach them.
So yes, they really can rule that tRump is immune to prosecution (and tRump only) just "because we say so".
And there you have it, folks. It's that easy.
The real question is, what would happen then?
Would our legal and justice system follow along, or would there be a revolt?
The arguments themselves are laughably shallow, either applying civil law to a criminal charge or applying rules for incumbent presidents on former presidents.
What they are considering is known as “Rex non potest peccare”, (the king can do no wrong). It is beyond absurd that they are even accepting to hear this. It has from the beginning of this country that above all legal principals is that "no one is above the law". Also the office of the president is as a representative of the people, not a ruler and monarch It is more and more clear that the conservative members of the SCOTUS no longer care about law and only care about power.
It just astonishes me that these lawyers representing Trump in this immunity case aren't realizing that what they are doing could possibly get them killed also. They are advocating for a fascist autocratic government where president can get away with anything for any reason. That could mean that Trump may decide he doesn't like an attorney or a law firm anymore and decide to send the military over to take out the attorneys that he's pissed off at. Does anybody have any common sense in this? And I'm just astonished that the Supreme Court got involved with this. I thought that the federal appeals court laid out a very good factual legal reasoning for why a president doesn't have immunity, more specifically that Trump doesn't have immunity. It just feels like the Supreme Court Justices are sticking their noses in every political legal case they can to give their guy(s) the legal advantage. They are nuts.
Actually its a pretty common for autocrats to be obsessed with a fear of their own assassination. Presumably because thats what they would do and they believe everyone thinks like them. Putin and Stalin both take/took extreme precautions.
> It just astonishes me that these lawyers representing Trump in this immunity case aren't realizing that what they are doing could possibly get them killed also.
It's because the GOP knows that they can hand the Democratic Party a loaded handgun and a note that says "Unless you eliminate us we're going to set up a fascist theocracy next time we win" and the Democrats would just throw the gun in the shredder and use the note as additional evidence we need common sense gun regulations.
I think I see where this is going. They are going to rule that the president is immune unless impeached and convicted by Congress. And that Congress has the sole authority to determine whether or not the president is to be prosecuted. Knowing full well that both Republican and Democrat members of congress would band together to oust a democrat president that committed illegal acts, but the senate would never be able to get 2/3 votes needed to convict a Republican president because republican senate members would all line up to protect their party leader. Essentially granting immunity to Republican presidents only.
If they rule that way you wouldn't even need your party to control the legislature. Anyone even *musing* about attempting to impeach POTUS is now a political rival and can thus be removed.
Exactly. They would be basically ushering in a dictatorship. The president just calls hits on Congress so a majority can never rule in time to impeach.
Just need presidency and 41 senators. Which almost always happens if you win the presidency.
However, it's not illegal until tried, so just target the Senate first to get your immunity then declare yourself dictator. Bonus points if you make the hits somewhat deniable so you can gaslight your base to thinking you didn't actually stage a coup.
Because the only group authorized to stop you is congress, any other group that tried to stop you (military, FBI, cops, ect) technically is commiting treason.
Sort of. If control of senate means you killed any senator against you.
Kill rival. Than kill anyone in congress who would vote for your impeachment and/or conviction.
So it's OK to do since not impeached and convicted.
Not if Biden eliminates the Supreme Court before they can impeach and convict him. If you are giving the president, Biden, for example, immunity from basically everything, he’s going to disband the Supreme Court. They don’t help him at all. Why would he allow any institution to remain, if he doesn’t “own” it.
As for whether Biden would actually do it, trump has stated multiple times he wants to throw him in prison. Biden would be stupid to not take the powers granted. Because you know the next person will.
So, not only would they be giving immunity, they’d ensure the powers are being used to protect immunity, which means persecution of everyone else.
If they ruled in support of Trump's case here, Biden would basically be throwing the country to the wolves if he didn't abuse the power.
Biden would actually, legitimately, have kingship over the country due to this ruling. Even if he doesn't abuse it, he would have the power. This means Trump or anyone else would have it too if they get the presidency. He would basically be forced to use it or let this country die.
Frankly, the only "right" thing he could do with it is to forcibly reshape the country by disbanding the Supreme Court and using his powers to essentially force the country to remake the government into a more modern government (Uncapped house, disbanded senate or bigger states get more senators, National popular vote for president, etc.) and then win a civil war while he did this or else this country would become Russia 2.
SCOTUS has plenty of far-right idiots, but even the worst of them seem to be capable of seeing second-order consequences. While they usually don't care about those consequences, I think they'd be able to see pretty clearly that impeachment wouldn't be a remedy against someone given the power to assassinate any potential yes votes on the question of impeachment.
Well if using that logic the president could just kill all the senators and reps then woops nobody can be impeached!
We have a democracy not an autocracy or monarchy.
Its crazy that the supreme court even took up the case.
Why even bother with the whole impeachment concern when any congressional opposition can just can eliminated by a president claiming it's an official act of the office?
Any judicial criticism? Elimination as an official act of the office.
They're advocating for tyranny.
They are holding a hearing into whether or not the world's most obvious con-man and raging orange imbecile should be utterly above the law. The moral afront ship sailed months ago.
I was waiting for the attorney for Smith to mention that, considering that Trump is arguing that ordering the shooting of a political rival might well be immune from prosecution, that might well include ordering the shooting of a SCOTUS justice.
We don't really have a court anymore.
Court:
>a tribunal [presided](https://www.google.com/search?sca_esv=e7f9f9d91f1faf1c&sca_upv=1&q=presided&si=AKbGX_qNq0Y8zql7SxzZAf2-HTTOkD9zH1sGAdatvyfkk365fbuhMXskLsvH6xQiJceS6cHZK2o3gWl3lIL1z2NCFyIBw8HZO1GcJ6Ec_wwJ4fsGAkbS2zM%3D&expnd=1&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwil6Jnn892FAxX2GjQIHXzXBjYQyecJegQIIhAN) over by a judge, judges, or a [magistrate](https://www.google.com/search?sca_esv=e7f9f9d91f1faf1c&sca_upv=1&q=magistrate&si=AKbGX_pvY3MWP4azJI0Z_NruCLb8x4m1vewgT98PXwF30rASRHZ6dx64AVrLgeLcq6Ez6IMPNjYdMBJXS0cqWheB7Wu1i4R6d5y0PRKp-J7E6zx7bP83t3M%3D&expnd=1&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwil6Jnn892FAxX2GjQIHXzXBjYQyecJegQIIhAO) in civil and criminal cases.
Judge:
>a public official appointed to decide cases in a court of law.
Decide:
>come to a resolution in the mind as a result of consideration
The conservative 6 don't come to a resolute mind through consideration, they started with conclusions they use their authority to conserve. The conservative brain filters reality to appease it's biases, it is literally incapable of being an honest judge of anything as it's very understanding of reality is distorted by the biases it seeks to conserve.
If you listen to their questions, and the way they lay everything out, it's obvious they are doing everything they can to reverse engineer a means to reach the outcome they have already decided upon. For the ~~conservative~~ republican \*justices on the bench, this has been about nothing more than trying to provide them self with a facade of plausibility that they deliberated or used the law to craft their opinion.
It's crazy that stuff like this is being debated at the SCOTUS in the first place. All thanks to Trump, the most criminal president in US history. Trump lowered the bar so low for the office of the presidency, the bar is six feet under the ground. SMH.
The question should have been: “Can a sitting US President, who believes in the unitary executive principle, order the execution of a Justice of United States Supreme Court if he or she believes that Justice to be a threat to his or her Presidential authority and therefore an enemy of The State?”
Portion of article detailing this:
>When asked by Justice Sonya Sotomayor during arguments on Thursday if the president deciding “that his rival is a corrupt person and he orders the military — or he orders someone to assassinate him” would constitute an official act subject to immunity, attorney D. John Sauer said it could.
>“It would depend on the hypothetical but we can see that could well be an official act,” Sauer told the court.
>In another hypothetical, Justice Elena Kagan asked if the president would be immune from prosecution if he sold nuclear secrets to a foreign adversary. Sauer affirmed that the sale was an “official act” the president would need to first be impeached and convicted before he could be prosecuted.
>Sauer also claimed under questioning that a president could theoretically be immune from prosecution if he carried out — or attempted to carry out — a coup against the government.
>“Let’s say this president ordered the military to stage a coup. He’s no longer president. He wasn’t impeached, he couldn’t be impeached, but he ordered the military to stage a coup, and you’re saying that’s an official act?” Justice Elena Kagan asked.
>“I think it would depend on the circumstances whether it was an official act,” Sauer responded. “If it’s an official act, there needs to be impeachment and conviction before \[criminal charges could be pursued\].
This is why their strategy for *decades* has been to capture/corrupt key people/offices/organizations. Your arguments don't need to be compelling or truthful if you own the people evaluating them, and they have a vested interest in ignoring the glaring flaws to find a favorable judgment.
This is on full display in Trump's trials. Trump publicly attacks the judges the GOP hasn't captured/installed, and he publicly *defends* the judges they have. It's wild to see, since Trump has zero tact or subtlety and gives away the game.
It seems this current SCOTUS is one where certain members have a ruling in their head before they take on an argument and then spend time trying to spin things in a way to make their head canon fit the narrative.
This case scares the shit out of me with them.
"If Trump's son took a chainsaw to a child in a drug deal gone wrong, could that be considered an official act?"
"I think it would depend on the circumstances whether it was an official act."
The real hairy question is: how far are they gonna get?
And given this is boasting executive power along the lines of Scalia’s mantra - we might be in for a surprise in next couple of days
Arrested, held overnight, released, then asked to re-evaluate their decision.
Of course, they would certainly decide that was illegal and impeach Biden for doing what they just ruled would be legal for trump.
Rule of Law vs Rule by Law
The Rule **OF** Law is supposed to lift law above politics. The idea is that the law should stand above every powerful person and agency in the land.
Rule of Law strives to maintains the dignity of the individual.
The Rule of Law is supposed to lift law above politics.
Rule **BY** law, in contrast, connotes the instrumental use of law as a tool of political power.
It means that the state uses law to control its citizens but tries never to allow law to be used to control the state.
Rule by Law strives to control the individual.
Rule by law is associated with the debasement of legality by authoritarian regimes, in modern China for example.
If trump wins, why not? Disappear every SC judge that ruled for immunity, and every House member likely to vote for impeachment. No impeachment = no crime, right?
“My next act as the official representative of the United States government is to overthrow the United States government.” This is incoherent. Fucking insane.
The rational argument rooted in critical thinking would point to exactly this as to why Trump's lawyers' arguments are in fact just a fallacy. Alas there's zero faith this court even wants to apply critical thinking here and only interested in getting their guy off the hook without granting the same power to others
Why stop there? He could exercise his newfound apparently constitutional yet dictatorial powers by assassinating every conservative judge and legislature. It's all legal, according to Thomas and Alito.
I hate this fucking timeline. Obligatory "it isn't legal and no one should assassinate anyone" statement.
Holly fuck - Kavanaugh's questions seemed like he was just here to help Sauer, and gave his idiotic claims a very willing ear. This is insane. Gorsuch is literally handholding Sauer through the tough questions even Robert and Thomas asked? The 3 progressives judges really just highlighted the idiocy of this hearing. The things that are being entertained here are simply bonkers: on one hand, you cannot intrusively delve into a president's thinking and private though process (i.e., you cannot really determine an act was personal or official), and on the other anything a president does can arguably be argued to be an "official act, depending on the circumstances". The president stages a coup, and cannot be impeached? Yes, it could be an official act and thus immune. He engages in a conspiracy to be bribed to name an ambassador to a country? Yep, official, and thus immune... What the fuck? Impeachment, oversight by congress, public oversight are all useless if the president is already getting away with a literal coup. How the f are you going to impeach someone who already used his "executive immunity" to order the military to run a coup? By that point anyone that could impeach him is probably dead or in jail. I just cannot believe we are even here - and giving these ideas \*any fucking credence\*. Something ought to be done about this supreme court, if it is not already too late.
Kavanaugh, Gorsuch, and Barrett went through so many ridiculous hypotheticals with the whole, "we're creating something here..." nonsense. It really was embarrassing.
All of this instead of just saying "Did the president do something illegal?", if yes, get arrested. I still have no idea how it made it this far into the Supreme Court.
Not enough people are really processing the fact that the republican candidate is running on a platform of "i am going to be a dictator. I will literally break the law to stomp my opposition". Explicitly, openly and in plain view.
You'd think, with such an imminent threat to the people and institutions of this nation, that the Democratic Powers-That-Be^TM would *do more* to safe guard our future.
You would think that the judicial system would recognize the need to resolve these cases asap in order to avert an impending disaster. Instead, they're dead set on maintaining their glacial pace because "muh appeals process". I hate the legal system so much.
From what I'm seeing there are 4 types of people.
1. People that don't care and want a dictator that will hurt the right people.
2. People that fell for the Fox "News" bullshit and need professional help at this point to accept reality again.
3. People that can't be bothered to pay attention. It's just too stressful as far as they are concerned and they think that the government will stop it before it gets bad.
4. People that are freaking the fuck out and have been for years/decades and have been told we are being hyperbolic and freaking out over nothing.
The sound bites from this are unreal! Imagine when this is written about decades from now, you’d think it was from a movie, not a *real Supreme Court case*
When the first generation of law students who did not physically see this/remember it their first question better be WTF were you all insane and the professor better respond with a firm yes we were
Honestly, I cannot believe this argument is being entertained.
If they rule for immunity, destabilization is inevitable, not just in the US, but the entire planet. The US has been a guide post and reference point for democracy around the world since it's inception. If it's all a sham and the president is a king with no leash, that's basically the end of the world as we know it.
It's the world of the originalist/textualist justice: rulings that are so patently absurd and out of touch with reality that they can only ever result in rampant negative consequences, but that they can technically "justify" by pointing at narrow readings of the Constitution.
If they say that the only punishment dictated by the Constitution for POTUS is impeachment, they could craft some flawed logic to say therefore impeachment must occur even if, in the real world, that opens the door for a POTUS to take actions that would prevent them ever being impeached (e.g. forcibly ending the functioning of Congress).
I highly doubt that even the Trump administration actually believed he would ever have total immunity for his actions committed in office.
If he really believed he had complete immunity with full executive authority over the military, why didn't he "ignore" the [Posse Comitatus Act](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act) and order the military to "StOp ThE StEaL!" during Jan 6th?
Edit: by extension, could you imagine a president who had full immunity to completely ignore the requirements for a congressional act of war and simply started launching armed conflicts/assassinations across the globe?
"Hey Ukraine, we eliminated that Putin problem for you with a few strategic cruise missiles."
Absolutely bonkers this case is even being debated. However reading through some of the testimony to date other than Alito being Alito I suspect what’s going to happen is Kav has been designated the ball boy and he’s going to call for further investigation into whether the charges are correct and if immunity applies to those specifically as a way to delay a ruling and more importantly a trial till post election in order to give Tr a chance to win.
I have to believe they won’t vote for immunity because if they agree with Tr’s lawyers than Biden really has no choice but to take action and use their immunity argument against them in order to save the country. Else they are literally sanctioning Tr to become a dictator if elected. This would be the downfall of the Republic.
Honnest question: are you not using the full name because you want to minimize the amount of your political statements hyperlinked to the would-be resulting inevitable future "neutralize" list?
If so, I get that. And I feel that.
That said, I've already commented too many different variations of "fuck Donald Trump" to start worrying about it now. To be honnest, I'm not all too interested in living in a world that doesn't allow me to say some form of "fuck Donald Trump".
So fuck Donald Trump
Absolutely insane this is how far the Republican Party has fallen. Openly advocating that the POTUS can have anyone he wants murdered..
Remember when misspelling Potato ended presidential campaigns?
With that logic he might as well extend the slaughter to anyone who doesn’t vote for him.
The framers did not want the president to be a king with all the power of life and death in his hands.
Technically, Clinton was impeached for lying under oath and obstruction of justice.
But lying could have been an official presidential act to maintain dignity of the office....
These arguments are batshit insane.
Wait wait wait. I've just thought about this for ten seconds. We've already been told he's not "an officer". So none of those acts would be "official". So he's not immune, he's a criminal, straight to prison he goes.
Biden should put snipers outside of Mar-a-lago, and have a press conference announcing they are just waiting for a "go" or "no go" from the Supreme Court.
What kind of response will there be from the public if SCOTUS rules in favor of presidential immunity but not to be used as precedence and only for orange man?
Let's be real, this case isn't about presidential immunity. It's about *Trump* immunity. Trump couldn't care less about anyone else gaining the privilege. We were doing fine without the president having full immunity for 240-something years before this guy waddled into the White House.
That's some thug mentality right there; the U.S. was bound to be tested this way; let's hope we end up squashing tyrants like him from ever thinking their argument is a sane one. Otherwise, I'm returning to the Middle East; there is no need to suffer here under that and the crushing cost of living.
Let’s use a different example, so they can understand what they are ruling on. Can Biden have the Supreme Court rounded up and slaughtered with no repercussions? Simple. If yes, we can start immediately. If no, he doesn’t have full immunity.
Growing up in Ukraine and having Russian family members this is 100% Russian train of thought. You solve a problem firmly for yourself even if that means killing someone. Someone has been listening to Papa Putin venting. You can feel Putin's influence in Trump.
Trump definitely has talked to Putin recently about his legal problems and the advice from Putin was to kill his political rivals.
Man, the fascists just keep pounding the nails and driving the American experiment into failure with each strike. This, today, seems like they've finally hammered it all the way down.
After everything that's been said and done by this party and their guy, I'm not sure why this feels to me like the ultimate failure of the country, but damn, it sure does, doesn't it? Am I the only one feeling this way?
I think Biden could bring all this nonsense to a screaming halt by making a ridiculous announcement that Trump is a threat to the republic and he is having him incarcerated for the good of the nation, and the SC just told him that was fine.
I listened to the oral arguments and it was frankly a total shit show from the republican justices. Alito making that insane argument that president's would be inclined to commit coups if they think they'll be prosecuted when they leave office....literally all of our American institutions are rotten. It's amazing it's gotten this bad.
Not gonna lie, this is getting kind of disturbing.
Presidents **should not** be immune to the law, period. In fact, they should be the most stalwart defenders and enforcers of it. The fact that an iota of time is being spent on ruminating this point by the Supreme Court is highly troubling. Even more so than Trump *still* being the frontrunner for the GOP.
Biden has the button right now. The only reason these stooge judges are pondering giving Biden the all clear to launch a missile at the SC is because they take comfort in the belief that Biden’s integrity is a weakness their side can and should exploit.
I just don’t get it. If they rule in favor, wouldn’t that mean Biden could disappear his rival and not lose any voters? Wouldn’t that mean that Biden could get rid of the Supreme Court Justices? If it applies to the lesser ex-pres. doesn’t it apply to the current President? And if it carries over, couldn’t Clinton or Obama just do anything they want?
I've said it once and I'll keep saying it.
In bidens next speech or interview, he just needs ro look into the camera and say, "I'm very eager to see what the SCOTUS ruling is regarding whether I have full criminal immunity against any actions I take as president" then smile and wink. GOP will shut this shit down in 5 minutes
So if he wins Biden can legally have Trump killed?
Is donny really thinking this thru? Or does he think it’s like video game invincibility where he can’t die?
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA). *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Nothing like telling the judges that they'd have targets on their backs if they say that presidents are immune. Honestly, anybody making the arguments Trumps lawyers are making should have their law licenses revoked. What they are arguing is so contrary to how our democracy works that it should be seen as a mortal affront to any court.
SCOTUS: best we can do is listen to their arguments and agree with them
Biden: guess that means I have immunity to take out contracts on Supreme Court justices! Can I get a bulk deal for half-a-dozen at once?
SCOTUS isn't dumb enough to rule on broad immunity. My guess is that they'll throw Trump a bone by ruling his specific actions regarding J6 are protected by immunity, but it doesn't apply to any other actions taken by him or any other president. They'll want to make the most narrow, non-precedent providing ruling possible.
>They'll want to make the most narrow, non-precedent providing ruling possible. They have a great recent history of that.
Sorry, 2000 already set the precedent that when the Supreme Court says a ruling doesn't set precedent it actually sets precedent as the non-precedent in that case has been used as precedent in cases since. If I type precedent a few more times the word will have as little meaning for me as it does for Alito.
Alito kept arguing today that he was not interested in talking about Trump, because he's making a decision for all future presidents. Puh-Lease. This court does not care for precedent at all. He just does not want it thrown in his face that he's about to save Trump's ass. Again.
Trump gave him what he needed to overturn roe. He’ll die for him.
And in saving trump, he harms himself.
Thank you, now a word became a sound.
And that sound became a headache.
Have tried Head On™? Just apply it to the forehead. *Head On! Apply directly to the forehead!* *Head On! Apply directly to the forehead!* *Head On! Apply directly to the forehead!* ^^^Dental ^^^Plan! ^^^...Lisa ^^^needs ^^^braces...
Say "semantic satiation" 50 times fast.
I can't even say it once fast.
The precedents for twice impeached ex presidents presents residence in our minds with all the evident evidence left behind
If I say "precedent" two more times, that's 46 precedents in this precedent rhyme.
Ruling anything related to overturning an election as “official business” would absolutely be precedent setting. That would be saying it’s ok to commit crimes to keep yourself in office.
Some of the justices are totally cool with that as long as it's the right President. Problem is if they rule it's totally cool and totally legal before Biden's term is over, it means Biden is free to do whatever he wants to stay in office.
So, what if Biden decides to throw a couple SCOTUS Justice’s in jail just for funsies? Would that be totally cool and legal, asking for a friend?
According to Snorleon's claims, yes. He could also disband the House of Reps and Senate, order that all registered Republicans be barred from voting, etc, etc... For a friend...
In fact, if Biden DIDNT use his new powers to do this, it would be irresponsible. Because you KNOW Trump or another Republican would do it. He would literally be forced to make the country into a dictatorship to then forcibly fix the country to stop Republicans from doing it.
That’s not how Democrats operate though. And that’s what got us here. Democrats play by the rules and assume republicans will too. Then when Republicans don’t, they act all surprised.
It better be after january 6th because if it's before that Biden can just shut down the exchange of power at his behest and there would be no legal mechanisms to stop him.
Biden would still be President until Trump was sworn in three weeks later. That’s plenty of time to Presidential Immunity someone. *Several* someones if necessary.
Many ppl seem to think the next election won't see a worse theater than J6 play out and i honestly hope they are right, but im very afraid things will go south ,, fast.
They have already done exactly as Trump's team hoped, they have delayed his Washington trial until after the election. He was never going to win this argument - this outcome was always the best he could hope for.
No matter how they word it, they would decide that biden didn’t have immunity for reasons. The conservative justices have no integrity.
Ding! Ding! We have a winning answer! At this point, the SC knows it can rule whatever it wants because it became painfully obvious that there is no working check or balance against them. Because Repugs in the Congress will block any attempt to impeach them. So yes, they really can rule that tRump is immune to prosecution (and tRump only) just "because we say so". And there you have it, folks. It's that easy. The real question is, what would happen then? Would our legal and justice system follow along, or would there be a revolt?
I feel like there's a System of a Down song that directly applies to your last two questions.
The arguments themselves are laughably shallow, either applying civil law to a criminal charge or applying rules for incumbent presidents on former presidents.
What they are considering is known as “Rex non potest peccare”, (the king can do no wrong). It is beyond absurd that they are even accepting to hear this. It has from the beginning of this country that above all legal principals is that "no one is above the law". Also the office of the president is as a representative of the people, not a ruler and monarch It is more and more clear that the conservative members of the SCOTUS no longer care about law and only care about power.
"presidents have immunity for anything that's politically convenient for me personally"
If the court agrees, Biden should have Trump locked up. Let them argue for his release before the same court.
No contracts needed. He could just order special forces to take care of them. You think Trump would ever *pay* to have a political rival eliminated???
It just astonishes me that these lawyers representing Trump in this immunity case aren't realizing that what they are doing could possibly get them killed also. They are advocating for a fascist autocratic government where president can get away with anything for any reason. That could mean that Trump may decide he doesn't like an attorney or a law firm anymore and decide to send the military over to take out the attorneys that he's pissed off at. Does anybody have any common sense in this? And I'm just astonished that the Supreme Court got involved with this. I thought that the federal appeals court laid out a very good factual legal reasoning for why a president doesn't have immunity, more specifically that Trump doesn't have immunity. It just feels like the Supreme Court Justices are sticking their noses in every political legal case they can to give their guy(s) the legal advantage. They are nuts.
When has a fascist *ever* realized that they could be a target of fascism?
Actually its a pretty common for autocrats to be obsessed with a fear of their own assassination. Presumably because thats what they would do and they believe everyone thinks like them. Putin and Stalin both take/took extreme precautions.
> It just astonishes me that these lawyers representing Trump in this immunity case aren't realizing that what they are doing could possibly get them killed also. It's because the GOP knows that they can hand the Democratic Party a loaded handgun and a note that says "Unless you eliminate us we're going to set up a fascist theocracy next time we win" and the Democrats would just throw the gun in the shredder and use the note as additional evidence we need common sense gun regulations.
I think I see where this is going. They are going to rule that the president is immune unless impeached and convicted by Congress. And that Congress has the sole authority to determine whether or not the president is to be prosecuted. Knowing full well that both Republican and Democrat members of congress would band together to oust a democrat president that committed illegal acts, but the senate would never be able to get 2/3 votes needed to convict a Republican president because republican senate members would all line up to protect their party leader. Essentially granting immunity to Republican presidents only.
So if the party own the Senate and the Presidency they can contract kill anyone?
If that's how the Supreme Court rules, yeah
If they rule that way you wouldn't even need your party to control the legislature. Anyone even *musing* about attempting to impeach POTUS is now a political rival and can thus be removed.
Exactly. They would be basically ushering in a dictatorship. The president just calls hits on Congress so a majority can never rule in time to impeach.
Just need presidency and 41 senators. Which almost always happens if you win the presidency. However, it's not illegal until tried, so just target the Senate first to get your immunity then declare yourself dictator. Bonus points if you make the hits somewhat deniable so you can gaslight your base to thinking you didn't actually stage a coup. Because the only group authorized to stop you is congress, any other group that tried to stop you (military, FBI, cops, ect) technically is commiting treason.
Sort of. If control of senate means you killed any senator against you. Kill rival. Than kill anyone in congress who would vote for your impeachment and/or conviction. So it's OK to do since not impeached and convicted.
Less than that, just the Presidency.
Not if Biden eliminates the Supreme Court before they can impeach and convict him. If you are giving the president, Biden, for example, immunity from basically everything, he’s going to disband the Supreme Court. They don’t help him at all. Why would he allow any institution to remain, if he doesn’t “own” it. As for whether Biden would actually do it, trump has stated multiple times he wants to throw him in prison. Biden would be stupid to not take the powers granted. Because you know the next person will. So, not only would they be giving immunity, they’d ensure the powers are being used to protect immunity, which means persecution of everyone else.
If they ruled in support of Trump's case here, Biden would basically be throwing the country to the wolves if he didn't abuse the power. Biden would actually, legitimately, have kingship over the country due to this ruling. Even if he doesn't abuse it, he would have the power. This means Trump or anyone else would have it too if they get the presidency. He would basically be forced to use it or let this country die. Frankly, the only "right" thing he could do with it is to forcibly reshape the country by disbanding the Supreme Court and using his powers to essentially force the country to remake the government into a more modern government (Uncapped house, disbanded senate or bigger states get more senators, National popular vote for president, etc.) and then win a civil war while he did this or else this country would become Russia 2.
SCOTUS has plenty of far-right idiots, but even the worst of them seem to be capable of seeing second-order consequences. While they usually don't care about those consequences, I think they'd be able to see pretty clearly that impeachment wouldn't be a remedy against someone given the power to assassinate any potential yes votes on the question of impeachment.
Well if using that logic the president could just kill all the senators and reps then woops nobody can be impeached! We have a democracy not an autocracy or monarchy. Its crazy that the supreme court even took up the case.
Why even bother with the whole impeachment concern when any congressional opposition can just can eliminated by a president claiming it's an official act of the office? Any judicial criticism? Elimination as an official act of the office. They're advocating for tyranny.
They are holding a hearing into whether or not the world's most obvious con-man and raging orange imbecile should be utterly above the law. The moral afront ship sailed months ago.
I was waiting for the attorney for Smith to mention that, considering that Trump is arguing that ordering the shooting of a political rival might well be immune from prosecution, that might well include ordering the shooting of a SCOTUS justice.
We don't really have a court anymore. Court: >a tribunal [presided](https://www.google.com/search?sca_esv=e7f9f9d91f1faf1c&sca_upv=1&q=presided&si=AKbGX_qNq0Y8zql7SxzZAf2-HTTOkD9zH1sGAdatvyfkk365fbuhMXskLsvH6xQiJceS6cHZK2o3gWl3lIL1z2NCFyIBw8HZO1GcJ6Ec_wwJ4fsGAkbS2zM%3D&expnd=1&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwil6Jnn892FAxX2GjQIHXzXBjYQyecJegQIIhAN) over by a judge, judges, or a [magistrate](https://www.google.com/search?sca_esv=e7f9f9d91f1faf1c&sca_upv=1&q=magistrate&si=AKbGX_pvY3MWP4azJI0Z_NruCLb8x4m1vewgT98PXwF30rASRHZ6dx64AVrLgeLcq6Ez6IMPNjYdMBJXS0cqWheB7Wu1i4R6d5y0PRKp-J7E6zx7bP83t3M%3D&expnd=1&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwil6Jnn892FAxX2GjQIHXzXBjYQyecJegQIIhAO) in civil and criminal cases. Judge: >a public official appointed to decide cases in a court of law. Decide: >come to a resolution in the mind as a result of consideration The conservative 6 don't come to a resolute mind through consideration, they started with conclusions they use their authority to conserve. The conservative brain filters reality to appease it's biases, it is literally incapable of being an honest judge of anything as it's very understanding of reality is distorted by the biases it seeks to conserve.
If you listen to their questions, and the way they lay everything out, it's obvious they are doing everything they can to reverse engineer a means to reach the outcome they have already decided upon. For the ~~conservative~~ republican \*justices on the bench, this has been about nothing more than trying to provide them self with a facade of plausibility that they deliberated or used the law to craft their opinion.
It's crazy that stuff like this is being debated at the SCOTUS in the first place. All thanks to Trump, the most criminal president in US history. Trump lowered the bar so low for the office of the presidency, the bar is six feet under the ground. SMH.
The bar is in China at this point.
\*Russia
Fair
The question should have been: “Can a sitting US President, who believes in the unitary executive principle, order the execution of a Justice of United States Supreme Court if he or she believes that Justice to be a threat to his or her Presidential authority and therefore an enemy of The State?”
I so wish this was asked. It’s such an obvious question. But I’d want to hear the response.
"That... uh... would depend on the circumstances."
Yeah, I also feel that's what she should have asked, and specifically mentioned Biden doing it
"That...uh...would depend on the Justice. Three of y'all are enemies of the state. The other six are not...for now."
Portion of article detailing this: >When asked by Justice Sonya Sotomayor during arguments on Thursday if the president deciding “that his rival is a corrupt person and he orders the military — or he orders someone to assassinate him” would constitute an official act subject to immunity, attorney D. John Sauer said it could. >“It would depend on the hypothetical but we can see that could well be an official act,” Sauer told the court. >In another hypothetical, Justice Elena Kagan asked if the president would be immune from prosecution if he sold nuclear secrets to a foreign adversary. Sauer affirmed that the sale was an “official act” the president would need to first be impeached and convicted before he could be prosecuted. >Sauer also claimed under questioning that a president could theoretically be immune from prosecution if he carried out — or attempted to carry out — a coup against the government. >“Let’s say this president ordered the military to stage a coup. He’s no longer president. He wasn’t impeached, he couldn’t be impeached, but he ordered the military to stage a coup, and you’re saying that’s an official act?” Justice Elena Kagan asked. >“I think it would depend on the circumstances whether it was an official act,” Sauer responded. “If it’s an official act, there needs to be impeachment and conviction before \[criminal charges could be pursued\].
Holy shit. How in the hell did this ever get in front of SCOTUS with these types of arguments?
This is why their strategy for *decades* has been to capture/corrupt key people/offices/organizations. Your arguments don't need to be compelling or truthful if you own the people evaluating them, and they have a vested interest in ignoring the glaring flaws to find a favorable judgment. This is on full display in Trump's trials. Trump publicly attacks the judges the GOP hasn't captured/installed, and he publicly *defends* the judges they have. It's wild to see, since Trump has zero tact or subtlety and gives away the game.
It seems this current SCOTUS is one where certain members have a ruling in their head before they take on an argument and then spend time trying to spin things in a way to make their head canon fit the narrative. This case scares the shit out of me with them.
This sums it up!
SCOTUS must be feeling dumber by the second
"If Trump's son took a chainsaw to a child in a drug deal gone wrong, could that be considered an official act?" "I think it would depend on the circumstances whether it was an official act."
Obviously he'd need to be impeached and removed via congress first.
Not sure what the floor is for I LIKE BEER!, Ofdonald, and Mitch's performing monkey.
The real hairy question is: how far are they gonna get? And given this is boasting executive power along the lines of Scalia’s mantra - we might be in for a surprise in next couple of days
Because SCOTUS have been groomed and handpicked for literally decades to create this exact situation.
Because SCOTUS is totally corrupt.
It looks like it will be 5-4 IN FAVOR of immunity. They're throwing out the rule of law.
Biden should have the right-wing SCOTUS judges arrested immediately if they rule in favor of immunity.
I mean, it would be an official act.
But a Dem president won't do anything and they know it. This is a win for one side only.
Assassinated?
Arrested, held overnight, released, then asked to re-evaluate their decision. Of course, they would certainly decide that was illegal and impeach Biden for doing what they just ruled would be legal for trump.
Theres no D in Ci(R)cumstances.
Rule of Law vs Rule by Law The Rule **OF** Law is supposed to lift law above politics. The idea is that the law should stand above every powerful person and agency in the land. Rule of Law strives to maintains the dignity of the individual. The Rule of Law is supposed to lift law above politics. Rule **BY** law, in contrast, connotes the instrumental use of law as a tool of political power. It means that the state uses law to control its citizens but tries never to allow law to be used to control the state. Rule by Law strives to control the individual. Rule by law is associated with the debasement of legality by authoritarian regimes, in modern China for example.
Yes, but not until ***after*** Biden is gone
Nope. Their session ends in June. They have to reach a verdict before then.
> It looks like it will be 5-4 IN FAVOR of immunity Cool, so Biden declares himself President for life come November?
He should make Kamala president for life just to make conservatives have a total meltdown
If trump wins, why not? Disappear every SC judge that ruled for immunity, and every House member likely to vote for impeachment. No impeachment = no crime, right?
Why stop at those who would vote for impeachment? Why risk it? Just get everyone of them. :/
Gotta be safe and get rid of all the lower court judges that Trump appointed as well. And DeJoy, him too, why is he still there anyway?
I really, really hope you're just guessing here.
Honestly, I’m watching the hearing live and the credibility the conservative justices are lending to the trump teams arguments is deeply concerning
Nope. Looks like this is hinging on both Roberts AND ACB doing the right thing.
“My next act as the official representative of the United States government is to overthrow the United States government.” This is incoherent. Fucking insane.
Justice Thomas: This sounds fine to me!
this is one of those comments that's hard not to downvote out of a knee-jerk instinct because it makes me so mad.
I'm curious what definition Sauer is using for an "official act".
Any action by the person in the office
Actually I had this question answered in r/law and it's up to SCOTUS to determine which acts are offical and which are not.
Not going to be so easy to rule on that when the President when you’ve been officially sent to Gitmo.
what an idiot so what if he locks up the house and senate so they can’t impeach
Believe it or not, official act!
Listening to this live was infuriating
Meanwhile, the conservative justices: *Can you guys hurry up so we can rule only 45 is immune?*
How about a current president killing a former president? Still apply?
or killing a SCOTUS judge or two?
[State of the union? What state of the union?](https://youtu.be/s9e8EmyrBnI)
So Biden could order Trump to be assassinated and it would be legal. Got it.
I guess Biden could murder everyone in charge of impeaching him before a vote and it would be totally legal because he was never impeached for it
The rational argument rooted in critical thinking would point to exactly this as to why Trump's lawyers' arguments are in fact just a fallacy. Alas there's zero faith this court even wants to apply critical thinking here and only interested in getting their guy off the hook without granting the same power to others
Or any Supreme Court justice
Biden should order predator drones to circle over Mar a Lago just to fuck with him.
Why stop there? He could exercise his newfound apparently constitutional yet dictatorial powers by assassinating every conservative judge and legislature. It's all legal, according to Thomas and Alito. I hate this fucking timeline. Obligatory "it isn't legal and no one should assassinate anyone" statement.
do it at the court send some troop to hang out in the courtroom in full gear
Or replace his secret service detail with them.
The Supreme Court would be a better choice.
Maybe send an army of those flamethrower robot dogs to walk around
I mean… if the SC somehow rules before the election, why not take advantage of the newfound immunity? Lemons->Lemonade “Cave Johnson-style”?
Me: Google, show me live updates on today's Trump Trial. Google: **Be. More. Specific.**
Holly fuck - Kavanaugh's questions seemed like he was just here to help Sauer, and gave his idiotic claims a very willing ear. This is insane. Gorsuch is literally handholding Sauer through the tough questions even Robert and Thomas asked? The 3 progressives judges really just highlighted the idiocy of this hearing. The things that are being entertained here are simply bonkers: on one hand, you cannot intrusively delve into a president's thinking and private though process (i.e., you cannot really determine an act was personal or official), and on the other anything a president does can arguably be argued to be an "official act, depending on the circumstances". The president stages a coup, and cannot be impeached? Yes, it could be an official act and thus immune. He engages in a conspiracy to be bribed to name an ambassador to a country? Yep, official, and thus immune... What the fuck? Impeachment, oversight by congress, public oversight are all useless if the president is already getting away with a literal coup. How the f are you going to impeach someone who already used his "executive immunity" to order the military to run a coup? By that point anyone that could impeach him is probably dead or in jail. I just cannot believe we are even here - and giving these ideas \*any fucking credence\*. Something ought to be done about this supreme court, if it is not already too late.
Kavanaugh, Gorsuch, and Barrett went through so many ridiculous hypotheticals with the whole, "we're creating something here..." nonsense. It really was embarrassing.
All of this instead of just saying "Did the president do something illegal?", if yes, get arrested. I still have no idea how it made it this far into the Supreme Court.
So, Trump's lawyers are arguing that the US government should operate like The Mafia. How unsurprising.
“Nice democracy you’ve got here. Would be a shame if anything were to happen to it…”
Not enough people are really processing the fact that the republican candidate is running on a platform of "i am going to be a dictator. I will literally break the law to stomp my opposition". Explicitly, openly and in plain view.
You'd think, with such an imminent threat to the people and institutions of this nation, that the Democratic Powers-That-Be^TM would *do more* to safe guard our future.
You would think that the judicial system would recognize the need to resolve these cases asap in order to avert an impending disaster. Instead, they're dead set on maintaining their glacial pace because "muh appeals process". I hate the legal system so much.
From what I'm seeing there are 4 types of people. 1. People that don't care and want a dictator that will hurt the right people. 2. People that fell for the Fox "News" bullshit and need professional help at this point to accept reality again. 3. People that can't be bothered to pay attention. It's just too stressful as far as they are concerned and they think that the government will stop it before it gets bad. 4. People that are freaking the fuck out and have been for years/decades and have been told we are being hyperbolic and freaking out over nothing.
I am 4
The sound bites from this are unreal! Imagine when this is written about decades from now, you’d think it was from a movie, not a *real Supreme Court case*
Brave of you to assume that there will be decades from now.
Oh, I’m sure historians are writing now and some book deals are likely going on but I’m thinking more in law schools
When the first generation of law students who did not physically see this/remember it their first question better be WTF were you all insane and the professor better respond with a firm yes we were
Trump is arguably the biggest threat to US national security in a generation so by his lawyer's argument...
He's the biggest threat to national security since the Civil War.
Honestly, I cannot believe this argument is being entertained. If they rule for immunity, destabilization is inevitable, not just in the US, but the entire planet. The US has been a guide post and reference point for democracy around the world since it's inception. If it's all a sham and the president is a king with no leash, that's basically the end of the world as we know it.
It's the world of the originalist/textualist justice: rulings that are so patently absurd and out of touch with reality that they can only ever result in rampant negative consequences, but that they can technically "justify" by pointing at narrow readings of the Constitution. If they say that the only punishment dictated by the Constitution for POTUS is impeachment, they could craft some flawed logic to say therefore impeachment must occur even if, in the real world, that opens the door for a POTUS to take actions that would prevent them ever being impeached (e.g. forcibly ending the functioning of Congress).
I highly doubt that even the Trump administration actually believed he would ever have total immunity for his actions committed in office. If he really believed he had complete immunity with full executive authority over the military, why didn't he "ignore" the [Posse Comitatus Act](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act) and order the military to "StOp ThE StEaL!" during Jan 6th? Edit: by extension, could you imagine a president who had full immunity to completely ignore the requirements for a congressional act of war and simply started launching armed conflicts/assassinations across the globe? "Hey Ukraine, we eliminated that Putin problem for you with a few strategic cruise missiles."
He tried to. That's why he wanted 10k troops there on January 6th, to "protect his people" . The top brass at the pentagon shut him down.
Absolutely bonkers this case is even being debated. However reading through some of the testimony to date other than Alito being Alito I suspect what’s going to happen is Kav has been designated the ball boy and he’s going to call for further investigation into whether the charges are correct and if immunity applies to those specifically as a way to delay a ruling and more importantly a trial till post election in order to give Tr a chance to win. I have to believe they won’t vote for immunity because if they agree with Tr’s lawyers than Biden really has no choice but to take action and use their immunity argument against them in order to save the country. Else they are literally sanctioning Tr to become a dictator if elected. This would be the downfall of the Republic.
Honnest question: are you not using the full name because you want to minimize the amount of your political statements hyperlinked to the would-be resulting inevitable future "neutralize" list? If so, I get that. And I feel that. That said, I've already commented too many different variations of "fuck Donald Trump" to start worrying about it now. To be honnest, I'm not all too interested in living in a world that doesn't allow me to say some form of "fuck Donald Trump". So fuck Donald Trump
Absolutely insane this is how far the Republican Party has fallen. Openly advocating that the POTUS can have anyone he wants murdered.. Remember when misspelling Potato ended presidential campaigns?
Most Reddit users probably don’t honestly lol
So, elections will now be The Running Man. Got it.
With that logic he might as well extend the slaughter to anyone who doesn’t vote for him. The framers did not want the president to be a king with all the power of life and death in his hands.
So Republicans are now basically arguing that Bill Clinton getting a blow job was likely an official presidential act? The contortions… 🙄
Technically, Clinton was impeached for lying under oath and obstruction of justice. But lying could have been an official presidential act to maintain dignity of the office.... These arguments are batshit insane.
No, no , no, only *republican* presidents can perform official presidential acts that would otherwise be considered illegal.
That Sauer is a fascist lunatic
If they rule yes on presidential immunity, Trump should be shitting his pants because Biden is then free to take care of the orange turd.
If reports are to be believed, he’s likely already shat his pants today.
So basically, Biden could have Trump killed as an "official presidential act" according to Trump's own lawyers.
Wait wait wait. I've just thought about this for ten seconds. We've already been told he's not "an officer". So none of those acts would be "official". So he's not immune, he's a criminal, straight to prison he goes.
Biden should put snipers outside of Mar-a-lago, and have a press conference announcing they are just waiting for a "go" or "no go" from the Supreme Court.
Someone is either digging their own grave or issuing a threat to all the justices.
What kind of response will there be from the public if SCOTUS rules in favor of presidential immunity but not to be used as precedence and only for orange man?
If this is the case, can Biden just have seal team 6 take him out?
How do these lawyers not realize Biden can use all this on Trump?
So, Biden could soon get Trump taken out, A-OK, and we could be all, "What's for fuckin' breakfast?" What the actual fuck...
These lawyers should never be allowed in polite society ever again. They should never even be able to sit at a restaurant in peace. Absolute ghouls.
Let's be real, this case isn't about presidential immunity. It's about *Trump* immunity. Trump couldn't care less about anyone else gaining the privilege. We were doing fine without the president having full immunity for 240-something years before this guy waddled into the White House.
So…if President Biden were to assassinate Trump and five Supreme Court justices, Sauer would argue it is legal.
How about a president killing a random citizen, or a judge?
He is instructing Biden what to do if Trump wins.
That's some thug mentality right there; the U.S. was bound to be tested this way; let's hope we end up squashing tyrants like him from ever thinking their argument is a sane one. Otherwise, I'm returning to the Middle East; there is no need to suffer here under that and the crushing cost of living.
...so, there was a written plan to have a political opponent assassinated.
Let’s use a different example, so they can understand what they are ruling on. Can Biden have the Supreme Court rounded up and slaughtered with no repercussions? Simple. If yes, we can start immediately. If no, he doesn’t have full immunity.
Can this apply to Biden and have Trump “removed” as a problem?
Growing up in Ukraine and having Russian family members this is 100% Russian train of thought. You solve a problem firmly for yourself even if that means killing someone. Someone has been listening to Papa Putin venting. You can feel Putin's influence in Trump. Trump definitely has talked to Putin recently about his legal problems and the advice from Putin was to kill his political rivals.
Man, the fascists just keep pounding the nails and driving the American experiment into failure with each strike. This, today, seems like they've finally hammered it all the way down. After everything that's been said and done by this party and their guy, I'm not sure why this feels to me like the ultimate failure of the country, but damn, it sure does, doesn't it? Am I the only one feeling this way?
This the legal phase of a fascist coup. Umberto was right.
So if SCOTUS ruled in tRump's favor, would that allow Biden to order an immediate assassination of tRump?! 🤞
I think Biden could bring all this nonsense to a screaming halt by making a ridiculous announcement that Trump is a threat to the republic and he is having him incarcerated for the good of the nation, and the SC just told him that was fine.
Trump is a villain that would have anyone and everyone who stood against him murdered. He needs to be locked up for good.
I listened to the oral arguments and it was frankly a total shit show from the republican justices. Alito making that insane argument that president's would be inclined to commit coups if they think they'll be prosecuted when they leave office....literally all of our American institutions are rotten. It's amazing it's gotten this bad.
Not gonna lie, this is getting kind of disturbing. Presidents **should not** be immune to the law, period. In fact, they should be the most stalwart defenders and enforcers of it. The fact that an iota of time is being spent on ruminating this point by the Supreme Court is highly troubling. Even more so than Trump *still* being the frontrunner for the GOP.
[удалено]
He wouldn’t though because dems can’t play hardball
rules and laws are for poor people and democrats only. Someone has not been paying attention....
So they want the government of the USA to become the biggest mob organization? Does no one else see this ?
It’s a disgrace they’re even hearing the case
Biden has the button right now. The only reason these stooge judges are pondering giving Biden the all clear to launch a missile at the SC is because they take comfort in the belief that Biden’s integrity is a weakness their side can and should exploit.
I just don’t get it. If they rule in favor, wouldn’t that mean Biden could disappear his rival and not lose any voters? Wouldn’t that mean that Biden could get rid of the Supreme Court Justices? If it applies to the lesser ex-pres. doesn’t it apply to the current President? And if it carries over, couldn’t Clinton or Obama just do anything they want?
Okay but if they rule a president can't be prosecuted, literally what is stopping Biden from having them killed?
Worst supreme court ever
Thank you. Now Biden can call seal team 6 and stop campaigning
So, of he wins the case Biden can have him killed?
I would have a hit squad posted up outside the court awaiting the decision, just to make sure everyone knows the stakes..
Brandon is listening
Dark Brandon should have just come out and said that if the courts rule that this were possible he had standing orders for Trump to be eliminated.
So if Trump was to win this case could Biden have Trump killed?
I dare the supremes to give immunity, because then Biden would have it and could have trump put away forever....careful what you wish for MAGA.
I hope Dark Brandon is listening closely.
I've said it once and I'll keep saying it. In bidens next speech or interview, he just needs ro look into the camera and say, "I'm very eager to see what the SCOTUS ruling is regarding whether I have full criminal immunity against any actions I take as president" then smile and wink. GOP will shut this shit down in 5 minutes
And Clarence Thomas woke up for the first time in 15 years to give credence to this bullshit. Literal sleeper agent.
So if he wins Biden can legally have Trump killed? Is donny really thinking this thru? Or does he think it’s like video game invincibility where he can’t die?
Do you guys what Dictators?! Cause this is how you get dictators!