TimLovesTech (AuDHD)(he/him)

Trump cares about one thing, Trump. If these policies will hurt people he sees as an enemy, he’ll be all for it. He doesn’t want to run a country, or do any work, he wants to be the “strong man” at the top everyone “respects/fears”. He gives zero shits about anyone or anything besides himself. This election is 100% about getting elected to keep himself out of jail, and of course his revenge on everyone trying to hold him accountable for his ever growing crime list.

He doesn’t want to be a part of it, because that’s like work. He’ll be 100% happy to let them do these horrible things and take credit for it later.

He’s running the country right now, unless you think it’s really Obama and/or the Lizard People.

They worded and ruled the way they did, because they know there is a 0% chance Biden would carry out anything he would have to declare immunity for, because he is so worried about being a “both sides” politician. And the SCOTUS didn’t make any of that “the law”, it’s still illegal, BUT the President can now claim immunity for breaking the law and nobody can do anything about it. It plays against the morals of the Left, since the Right sold their morals for power long ago.

And Biden could certainly do something that counters this without having to break the law, and exercise this new immunity. He could be running on expanding the Court, bumping the number to 13 Justices (one Justice for each US federal circuit court), adding new qualified Judges instead of inexperienced partisan hacks. He could run on adding rules on ethics and time limits for the Court, make the members (or a staggered amount of them) do a rotation out and back to one of the 13 US federal circuit court systems every 4 years (or whatever). This would go a long way against this weaponizing of the Court with bad faith Justices that are putting Politics/$ over the country and the law, and it would be all legal.

Except that it would be against the law, and it’s hard to contrast yourself with Trump if you are also now committing crimes (even if those crimes are for the bettering of the US). Immunity doesn’t blank your crimes from the public’s minds, and forcefully removing even bad faith Justices from the Supreme Court is not a great look when he has been campaigning on knowing “right from wrong” and respecting the rule of law.

If he isn’t going to, someone on the Left needs to start explaining from the rooftops to everyday people, “here is what this really means” with some crazy examples. And they should also be targeting Trumps own people as well, explaining that this is the power Biden has now, but if Biden is replaced that next (and likely more “radical left”) individual will now have all that power should they win in November. See how they feel about Harris being able to lock any of them up, without due process or even having to charge them, then being able to pardon her DOJ, and all of it would be untouchable.

Or since they love conspiracies, tell them Harris can wait and see who wins the election, and if they lose she could exercise the 25th on Biden, grab the power for herself, and declare Trump and his campaign all be rounded up and it would all be within her new powers and completely untouchable.

It’s not easy to have the whole internet locked up, and I’m sure Trumps trial only increased his cults attacks against her. Also nice victim shaming.

I think the Democrats need to do a much larger PSA about what exactly this means. I’m not sure 100% of Trumps cult, or many moderates, would be cool with knowing that Biden right now could have his DOJ lock up basically anyone in the US, with no reason needed, and then pardon them (his DOJ). This would all be actions that cannot be questioned, or used against the President as he has full immunity to:

1. pardon anyone for anything
2. command his DOJ

Those are the 2 examples that the Supreme Court majority gave as examples in their “ruling”, and they gave both a completely made up unconstitutional condition of immunity that cannot be used against the President, or questioned/debated in any way. These 2 items are a gift to Trump in their hope that he takes the white house and will allow him to round up everyone he wants and put them in death camps if he wanted. He orders his DOJ to do it, pardons them all, and it’s all above the law with no possible oversight available. But I think if more people on the right knew that Biden has this power right now, BUT!, if some on the left get their way and they replace Biden on the ballot, and they win, that person would now wield this absolute power.

Edit - Extra words =(

My understanding is that a President from founding until now has been afforded immunity from civil lawsuits for official duties, but it was never intended to shield a President against criminal prosecution. That is why Nixon stepped down, because he had crossed that line and was going to be criminally charged/prosecuted.

The court has now taken and re-written the law for Trump, knowing that Biden (or any Dem) President will not abuse this new King power that the Court put themselves in charge of determining what applies and what doesn’t. They have opened Pandora’s box thinking they can control this new power, but if a dictator wants to be a dictator, they will find a way around the Court. This is going to have long term major repercussions for generations.

You aren’t missing anything. Our Supreme Court is supposed to look at each case and make sure that the law was applied correctly according to the constitution and case law, but has now become an extension of Trump’s legal counsel doing backflips to bend (and inow seems also rewrite) the law to his benefit.

This is from snippets of Justice Sotomayer’s disent I found here.

Sotomayor said that the majority opinion, written by Chief Justice John Roberts, invents “an atextual, ahistorical, and unjustifiable immunity that puts the President above the law.” Their ruling, she went on, makes three moves that she said “completely insulate Presidents from criminal liability.” Sotomayor said the court creates absolute immunity for the president’s exercise of “core constitutional powers,” creates “expansive immunity for all ‘official acts,’” and “declares that evidence concerning acts for which the President is immune can play no role in any criminal prosecution against him.”

Yes, under the constitution, which the Court just put the President above. If the President might be immune then anything the President did is not admissible in court now. So how does the Senate even hold a trial, let alone convict a President when they cannot enter any evidence now?

This decision is written in a bad faith way to get Trump out of being tried, and with the knowledge that Biden will not exploit it and the hope that Trump wins and becomes our new king. The “conservative” Justices can get their “gratuity” and retire living out the rest of their lives taken care of.

The assassination of political rivals by Seal Team 6 is what Trump’s lawyer argued before the Supreme Court. They argued that anything the President orders is an official act, and immunity must apply to it (unless in their bad faith reading of the constitution he was impeached AND convicted by the Senate). But the court also said that if a President is immune, then by this new ruling the Presidents actions cannot be used in court, aka President is above the law without any check in place.

I think the intent of this ruling, and certainly the current interpretation is that anything anywhere in the scope of POTUS responsibilities is now above the law. So Trump can, and is going to argue that his insurrection was within his scope of protecting elections and therefore he has full immunity. He has also filed paperwork trying to have his election interference felony convictions overturned based on yesterday’s ruling. They have made POTUS a king at the discretion of the court, instead of the beholden to the constitution.

If a POTUS is immune can they be impeached? Or maybe impeached but not removed? As typically if one is immune it means they cannot be charged. If one cannot be charged how can they be impeached/removed?

When official means exist to remove non-qualified voters, but groups like this want to circumvent that, it tells you they are acting in bad faith and is the whole reason they don’t want to do it the official/legal way. This should be grounds for election interference, voter fraud, and voter suppression charges.

Groups like this are often using these group sourced lists of people that aren’t Republican, and are terribly inaccurate and full of flaws. These are the same people that were “finding” all the voter fraud they couldn’t prove, or show evidence of once those accusations had to be backed up by something in a courtroom.

Well like I’ve said in one of these threads, it really was the perfect storm for him. That was about as bad as he has looked and sounded in his almost 4 year term. I saw video of him at a campaign stop the next day and it was like night and day. He was still old, and still had a cold, but he looked more alive - for lack of a better word.

But I 100% agree that the party’s only choice shouldn’t be a rich white senior citizen. The minimum age requirement is 35, and we should be shooting for closer to that, rather than well past “retirement age”.

How often does either party primary an incumbent president? Wikipedia only lists five notable one. And also has this little factoid that shows it usually backfires for the party.

Since the advent of the modern primary election system in 1972, an incumbent president has never been defeated by a primary challenger, though every president who faced a strong primary challenge went on to be defeated in the general election.

Edit - Forgot my wiki link. =(

It’s great when the highest court in the land has decided to use the court as a weapon and reinterpret settled case law, which just happens to be in favor of the people giving them bribes gratuities. Weird that! Can’t wait for my friends to spend $2.4 million on me …