stevestojan Posted July 1 Posted July 1 (edited) As a lefty snowflake myself, isn’t this ruling just saying a POTUS can’t be bogged down with countless lawsuits and indictments for things he does as official acts of the office he holds, but can still be charged/sued/indicted for crazy ***** he might do on his own accord? I mean the two wingnuts we have for candidates currently make this a bit worrisome, but isn’t this a great thing for once we get someone younger than Stonehenge and more sane than a fruitcake in the Oval Office in 2028? Edit: it would be ‘29 to be in the oval. My bad. Edited July 1 by stevestojan 3
daz28 Posted July 1 Posted July 1 (edited) 25 minutes ago, stevestojan said: As a lefty snowflake myself, isn’t this ruling just saying a POTUS can’t be bogged down with countless lawsuits and indictments for things he does as official acts of the office he holds, but can still be charged/sued/indicted for crazy ***** he might do on his own accord? I mean the two wingnuts we have for candidates currently make this a bit worrisome, but isn’t this a great thing for once we get someone younger than Stonehenge and more sane than a fruitcake in the Oval Office in 2028? It completely opens the door up for nefarious criminal actions taken while actually in office, to protect them from what might possibly take place after they are no longer president. So to prevent a president from being wrongfully charged for 2 collateral American citizen deaths during a drone strike, they now can order intentional drone strikes on all American citizens w/o any retribution. For some reason the right seems to be cheering this on, but this is confirming that if any president, dem or repub, throws American citizens in internment camps, then it is not criminal. In Korematsu, they withheld from the courts that there was actually no credible threat from Japanese citizens, because they had executive privilege. The executive can literally hand the court only the information that supports their case, while withholding that which doesn't. The executive branch is not supposed to have this much power. It's actually quite shocking that small government conservatives are applauding this, but they've been mostly hijacked by MAGA extremist/cultists. Edited July 1 by daz28 1
Tiberius Posted July 1 Posted July 1 16 minutes ago, daz28 said: It completely opens the door up for nefarious criminal actions taken while actually in office, to protect them from what might possibly take place after they are no longer president. So to prevent a president from being wrongfully charged for 2 collateral American citizen deaths during a drone strike, they now can order intentional drone strikes on all American citizens w/o any retribution. For some reason the right seems to be cheering this on, but this is confirming that if any president, dem or repub, throws American citizens in internment camps, then it is not criminal. In Korematsu, they withheld from the courts that there was actually no credible threat from Japanese citizens, because they had executive privilege. The executive can literally hand the court only the information that supports their case, while withholding that which doesn't. The executive branch is not supposed to have this much power. It's actually quite shocking that small government conservatives are applauding this, but they've been mostly hijacked by MAGA extremist/cultists. These people claim to be textualist! The whole point of the Constitution is to do exactly the opposite of what these evil people just did
daz28 Posted July 1 Posted July 1 3 minutes ago, Tiberius said: These people claim to be textualist! The whole point of the Constitution is to do exactly the opposite of what these evil people just did Correct. The #1 principle this country was founded on was not having too much power in the hands of 1 man. They just handed him all the power he could ever need. People keep making this about trump, but this will live on FAR longer than him. As time passes, they(both sides) will continue to find ways to use this to unlock even more power. The only thing that was stopping them was justice. 2
stevestojan Posted July 1 Posted July 1 29 minutes ago, daz28 said: It completely opens the door up for nefarious criminal actions taken while actually in office, to protect them from what might possibly take place after they are no longer president. So to prevent a president from being wrongfully charged for 2 collateral American citizen deaths during a drone strike, they now can order intentional drone strikes on all American citizens w/o any retribution. For some reason the right seems to be cheering this on, but this is confirming that if any president, dem or repub, throws American citizens in internment camps, then it is not criminal. In Korematsu, they withheld from the courts that there was actually no credible threat from Japanese citizens, because they had executive privilege. The executive can literally hand the court only the information that supports their case, while withholding that which doesn't. The executive branch is not supposed to have this much power. It's actually quite shocking that small government conservatives are applauding this, but they've been mostly hijacked by MAGA extremist/cultists. Well that’s certainly more terrifying than my take.
daz28 Posted July 1 Posted July 1 1 minute ago, stevestojan said: Well that’s certainly more terrifying than my take. It's much, much scarier than that little tidbit I just gave you. At this point, we are relying on power hungry Macbeths to show the proper restraint.
4th&long Posted July 1 Posted July 1 (edited) 2 hours ago, boyst said: Queen. You're a f'n queen. You little person. The queers are back. Lock up the broom sticks. I’m a little person? Ha haha ha. I don’t chase people around on different message boards name calling like the little fa get. Edited July 1 by 4th&long
BillsFanNC Posted July 1 Posted July 1 Members of Congress have immunity both in civil and criminal instances for their official acts. And so do federal judges. So it makes sense for the President to have the same protections. The only reason we’re deciding this now is due to the fact that we’ve never had a former president charged in the history of our nation for something done as an official act. Biden and his Democrat henchmen broke that precedent, and they’ll come to regret it.
daz28 Posted July 1 Posted July 1 13 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said: Members of Congress have immunity both in civil and criminal instances for their official acts. And so do federal judges. So it makes sense for the President to have the same protections. The only reason we’re deciding this now is due to the fact that we’ve never had a former president charged in the history of our nation for something done as an official act. Biden and his Democrat henchmen broke that precedent, and they’ll come to regret it. Yeah, because Congressman and federal judges yield as much power as the president. Dum da dum dum dumbs(Tums). Fact: Twitter makes people dumber, and following Mike Davis is one of the dumbest. At least you can get your bias, of things that you aren't capable of understanding intelligently, confirmed. Just open up your mind, and let the cesspool of trash invade it for a quick jolt of dopamine.
4th&long Posted July 1 Posted July 1 4 minutes ago, daz28 said: Yeah, because Congressman and federal judges yield as much power as the president. Dum da dum dum dumbs(Tums). Fact: Twitter makes people dumber, and following Mike Davis is one of the dumbest. At least you can get your bias, of things that you aren't capable of understanding intelligently, confirmed. Just open up your mind, and let the cesspool of trash invade it for a quick jolt of dopamine. He’s *****en useless as ti ts on a bull. Just ignore that ass hat.
4th&long Posted July 1 Posted July 1 (edited) Yeah, the Supreme Court is not bought. Edited July 1 by 4th&long 1
daz28 Posted July 1 Posted July 1 29 minutes ago, 4th&long said: The funny part is they had already given them the right to cover up any evidence of the covert operation taken to get them. The administration can literally hand them only the information that they choose, which would prove their innocent. Whistleblower? Yeah, that isn't ever happening again. A bunch of short-sighted baboons. EASILY the most incompetent SC ever. 42 minutes ago, 4th&long said: Yeah, the Supreme Court is not bought. Impeachable offense. 1 1
Big Blitz Posted July 2 Posted July 2 No they are only talking to their extremist base now. Which is 90 percent of their voters. 1
boyst Posted July 2 Posted July 2 2 hours ago, 4th&long said: The queers are back. Lock up the broom sticks. I’m a little person? Ha haha ha. I don’t chase people around on different message boards name calling like the little fa get. Yes you do
daz28 Posted July 2 Posted July 2 8 minutes ago, JDHillFan said: It’s started! Oh cute, start with worst case scenario(Seal Team 6), then go with the most benign, and ignore all the good stuff in between. Nice. They just handed a TON of power to one branch, and make jokes. God I love the small government authoritarians.
Recommended Posts