![](https://badatbeing.social/pictrs/image/70390cba-8031-41d4-944f-fc15f7bc4a78.jpeg)
![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/db7182d9-181a-45e1-b0aa-6768f144911a.jpeg)
What a wild timeline we are in. He is only in trouble because he went along with the man that is now a 34 count felon. They then use the felons nonprofits to act as a slush fund to pay his legal bills, thus committing more crime! Brilliant!
Hi I’m Tim.
I’m AuDHD - officially diagnosed ADHD and self-diagnosed (for now) with ASD. I also suffer from a great deal of Imposter Syndrome.
What a wild timeline we are in. He is only in trouble because he went along with the man that is now a 34 count felon. They then use the felons nonprofits to act as a slush fund to pay his legal bills, thus committing more crime! Brilliant!
Yep, I had checked her age the other day because I knew she was close. I don’t think all the right of center Dems like Biden and Pelosi would get behind someone that progressive. They want someone that is going to play the both sides game, and play everything safe and like it’s 1990 and we don’t know that in 2024/2025 Republicans are going to try to burn the whole thing to the ground.
Yep, the Court did this all to set the stage for Trump knowing that Biden (or Dems) wouldn’t abuse the new power.
But since they aren’t going to abuse it they should be on every news station every night till the election explaining the danger of the Court. Hold press conferences everyday, make the Republicans have to take a stance on a Supreme Court writing new law instead of adjudicating cases like they are supposed to be doing. Make it so everyone that doesn’t normally follow the news finds out they just set the stage for Trump (or the next even further right fascist) winning.
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?
Guaranteed they do, but every member of the house that cares about democracy should bring their own. The Congress should be nothing but this until the election. Let the Republicans go on record everyday until the election denouncing democracy.
I see the /s but she says she will file articles of impeachment against one member of the Supreme Court once Congress is back. And it’s about time. They should all be bogging everything down with this until the election because it’s that important.
Well hindsight is always 20/20, and some of the topics you could tell Biden felt passionate about exacerbating his trouble articulating his thoughts. Overall I don’t think a “debate” is the correct format for trying to contrast himself with Trump. You can’t argue with the kid that is just going to stick out his tongue or make fart noises anytime you try and talk, and that is what Joe was trying to do with Trump.
Sorry, I can’t find it now. I know I read or heard it around the time of the debate, but have no idea where at this point so I’ve noted such above. And up until I saw a post here on Lemmy about how much of a train wreck it was early on I wasn’t even going to watch the debate at all, because I already know I’m pro-democracy and that is really what this election is all about.
Thank you for fact checking me though, I don’t want to be the source of inaccurate information.
Are these Black and Hispanic voters going to the guy that talked about immigrants “taking Black jobs?” or eventually “taking Hispanic jobs too”? How can any minority vote for a man that is clearly a racist through and through. His father was a racist, arrested marching with the KKK, and they both got fined for not renting to people of color. He has a history of using minority and immigrant labor so he can threaten and cheat them out of pay. The list goes on and on. Biden may not be a saint (far from it), but he at least believes in democracy.
Also that debate was the perfect storm for Biden.
I don’t disagree that Biden’s showing was disheartening, but I also think the fact that he was actually trying to convey a message, while having a firehouse of shit spewed at him from his right should factor into that as well. It was a “debate” with someone acting in bad faith and Joe trying to follow the rules, with basically no moderation at all. It wasn’t a debate, but more like trying to have a rational talk with a kid that just keeps sticking out his tongue and making fart noises.
He also followed that up with a line about immigrants coming after Hispanic jobs. I don’t know how any “debate” can be taken seriously when a candidate can say shit like that and the immediate follow up question isn’t, “Mr. Trump, what is a Black or Hispanic job?”.
These are companies not people (even though we treat them that way when convenient), and they broke a regulation that is part of their expected operating procedures. Why are we dragging this into court and seating a jury because a company didn’t do the thing they were supposed to do. They should have no presumption of innocence, the inspection is the proof one way or the other. This just lets them further delay any consequences, and will be another thing calculated into their cost analysis of “are we going to follow the rules” or is it more cost effective (at least short term because that’s what shareholders care about) to just NOT ever follow the rules, delay any fines, rinse and repeat?
It was certainly staged, she went on Bannon’s podcast right after complaining about it.
Lots of feels …
The dim lights in that crowded room
They came alive just as soon as
I saw you
As I saw you
What crawls out of a heart like this
Boarded up I’ve laid my bricks
But it’s all coming down
It’s all coming down
And though tomorrow scares the life from me sometimes
And though I know what sorrow means in my bones
And though the rain will always pour
I would rather feel it all than sleep anymore
I’d rather feel it all than sleep anymore
He won’t though, because he’s basically a moderate Republican that wants to both sides everything. He’s afraid to offend the same people stabbing him in the back.