Law Supreme Court makes watergate legal? President now has near immunity

Biden spoke and nothing was addressed expect.
Biden was just Angry at the decision.
 
idrankyourbeer's maid said:
@2:35 Clarence smacking Jack Smith
Click to expand...

Yep, you can always count on ol Clarence to write a separate concurrence spouting some radical shit that wasn’t a part of this case, wasn’t argued before him, that he wasn’t briefed on, and wasn’t ever brought up throughout this whole case except the one time he brought it up <lol>
Luckily no one else signed on to that silly shit.

But it’s positive news for Aileen Cannon—and Hunter Biden, I suppose, because if there’s no such thing as a Special Counsel that sure changes plans for his upcoming tax fraud trial.
 
This works for both sides. It could make about anything Biden does covered.
 
Loiosh said:
"Well, when the president does it, that means that it is not illegal"

- Nixon

Has this always been the conservative wet dream?
Click to expand...
It was literally the event that caused Roger Ailes to create Fox News. The blueprints for Fox News were made during the Nixon era. And I think if Fox News was around then, Nixon would have survived.
 
HOLA said:
You've just captured the entire essence of the MAGA movement in one sentence. Well done.
Click to expand...

It's a pretty decent benchmark if you look at what the loony left actually get upset about.
 
I have a feeling the Left Cult that is so upset about this didn't read it themselves and clearly doesn't understand it. They're hearing the MSNBC screechers and believing and repeating their lies once again. It's like watching Lucy with the football and the Lefties are Charlie Brown. There is no big danger with this ruling you dumb drones.
 
LMP said:
It's an empty ruling. They want the lower courts to rule that these were not official acts. Then it goes back to the SC were they will have to rule on that. This ruling doesn't state what acts are official and unofficial. The decent is about how ridiculous the argument Trump's team made. The Conservative judges didn't consider the arguments instead made a ruling that would just kick this back to them eventually. Instead of ruling on what is an official act or an unofficial this decision gives room for the Supreme Court to rule arbitrarily that abusing the powers of the Presidency is an official act.

The example of the President being able to assassinate his political rivals was an argument Trump's team made. Is that an official act? The Supreme Court left that wide open when it should clearly be viewed out side of the powers of a President. It's just a time waster of a ruling to buy Trump more time to draw out the Court cases against him. This gets kicked back down to the lower courts, they decide his action were unofficial, it gets appealed all the way back to the Supreme Court where they will have to rule against Trump, but if Trump wins then they most likely won't have to deal with this issue again.
Click to expand...
Don’t you think it’s a little disturbing that anything done or said in an “official act” can’t be used as evidence for a crime committed during a private act? Doesn’t sound like an empty ruling to me, but I’m open to being talked off the ledge.
 
sickc0d3r said:
Don’t you think it’s a little disturbing that anything done or said in an “official act” can’t be used as evidence for a crime committed during a private act? Doesn’t sound like an empty ruling to me, but I’m open to being talked off the ledge.
Click to expand...
No, you're right on the money. Not only is the President now the absolute final and inseparable authority on what the DOJ does at all times, which would easily enable them to completely prevent any investigations into themselves or their allies during their tenure, and give them free reign to fabricate as many sham charges against enemies as they want, but even in the event of something happening AND reaching the point of a criminal trial, the prosecution aren't allowed to consider or introduce motive, or include evidence that takes the form of an "official action" (definition tbd depending on who the President is and whether or not the SC likes them).
 
WhiteMousse said:
Thank you for the input. I meant what I said, if it turns out the way you outlined, I'll be talking to you about this. If I'm right you won't hear a peep. Well... maybe I'll DM you and lament how I should have taken you up on the bet

EDIT: What would you say to someone who simply says "I have a hard time believing that no other politician has slept with a hooker and tried to cover it up"?
Click to expand...
By all means, remind me if you turn out to be right.

Other politicians have done embarrassing or illegal things and have tried to cover it up. I didn't say otherwise. The specific crime Trump was convicted of in NY was falsfying business records, which he did to cover up a campaign-finance violation. That's too specific, but generally, Trump's behavior has been highly unusual (jokes aside, most politicians are not criminals), and when there is evidence that politicians have committed crimes (of any level of severity), it is pursued. Politicians are way less likely to get away with crimes than non-politicians.
 
sickc0d3r said:
Don’t you think it’s a little disturbing that anything done or said in an “official act” can’t be used as evidence for a crime committed during a private act? Doesn’t sound like an empty ruling to me, but I’m open to being talked off the ledge.
Click to expand...
The thing is though, this court didn't define what an official act is. I think a lot of people are worried that this means everything a president does gets to be considered an official act, so a president will be able to do anything. I will say that being incredibly vague does give the SC the ability to decide on a whim what is an official act or not and muddies the hell out of everything. The doom and gloom that this makes the president a king is an overreaction.
 
Limbo Pete said:
No, you're right on the money. Not only is the President now the absolute final and inseparable authority on what the DOJ does at all times, which would easily enable them to completely prevent any investigations into themselves or their allies during their tenure, and give them free reign to fabricate as many sham charges against enemies as they want, but even in the event of something happening AND reaching the point of a criminal trial, the prosecution aren't allowed to consider or introduce motive, or include evidence that takes the form of an "official action" (definition tbd depending on who the President is and whether or not the SC likes them).
Click to expand...
Great, thanks, I guess I’m still on the ledge. Martin Riggs is better at talking people down, ffs.
 
LMP said:
The thing is though, this court didn't define what an official act is. I think a lot of people are worried that this means everything a president does gets to be considered an official act, so a president will be able to do anything. I will say that being incredibly vague does give the SC the ability to decide on a whim what is an official act or not and muddies the hell out of everything. The doom and gloom that this makes the president a king is an overreaction.
Click to expand...
There's plenty in this decision that is totally unambiguous, either in explicit language or obvious intent, and would be awful enough on its own. Roberts fucking torched the idea of an independent DOJ, and then went even further than that. It is now actually possible, based explicitly on this ruling, for a sitting President to use the DOJ to target anyone they want with literally -literally- no possible fear of reprisal from the other branches outside of, I dunno, I guess getting impeached somehow (which isn't even a criminal proceeding anyway, so there still isn't a threat of going to prison). The courts are shut out. A person can undertake a criminal conspiracy at the behest of the President and 1) their communications are not admissible, 2) in the unlikely event of a trial, motive would be inadmissible, and 3) the President can simply pardon whoever he wants in the event the conspiracy gets revealed or a conviction occurs. This has created a bubble of criminal immunity around the President that is wildly out of line with anything we ever thought could happen in this country.
 
LMP said:
The thing is though, this court didn't define what an official act is. I think a lot of people are worried that this means everything a president does gets to be considered an official act, so a president will be able to do anything. I will say that being incredibly vague does give the SC the ability to decide on a whim what is an official act or not and muddies the hell out of everything. The doom and gloom that this makes the president a king is an overreaction.
Click to expand...
Yeah, this ain’t helping me either, pal. How hard is it to imagine a potus with bad intentions plotting something under the guise of official acts? Even Trump’s dipshit legal team could work out ways to hide anything they want to hide, with a willing head of the DOJ or whatever. And why is immunity even necessary for any “official act”, unless we’re saying official acts can in fact be illegal, so we can’t just use normal judgement in determining what’s official and what isn’t? I think it’s a little terrifying.
 
sickc0d3r said:
Yeah, this ain’t helping me either, pal. How hard is it to imagine a potus with bad intentions plotting something under the guise of official acts? Even Trump’s dipshit legal team could work out ways to hide anything they want to hide, with a willing head of the DOJ or whatever. And why is immunity even necessary for any “official act”, unless we’re saying official acts can in fact be illegal, so we can’t just use normal judgement in determining what’s official and what isn’t? I think it’s a little terrifying.
Click to expand...
That's just it: they don't even need to hide it
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

LeonardoBjj
Law US Supreme Court upholds federal domestic-violence gun ban
2 3
Replies
48
Views
1K
Belaya Smert
Belaya Smert

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,248,875
Messages
56,286,958
Members
175,149
Latest member
vagner augusto dos santos

Share this page

Back
Top