this post was submitted on 25 Apr 2024
7 points (100.0% liked)

politics

19096 readers
3469 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Sotomayor: If the president decides that his rival is a corrupt person and he orders the military to assasinate him, is that within his official acts to which he has immunity?

"That could well be an official act," Trump lawyer John Sauer says

top 22 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago

The right question to ask is whether the president can decide to assassinate a supreme court justice. Then it becomes plenty clear to the supreme court fucks how obviously insane the rationale is.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Biden should just send Seal Team 6 to whatever courthouse Trump's hush money trial is at and tell them to sit on the steps. If anyone asks why they're there, just saying "Waiting for the Supreme Court ruling". Maybe park another team on the Supreme Court steps with a sign that says "Waiting for Clarence Thomas."

Biden would not be committing an illegal act. He'd be ordering the teams to sit on the steps and wait. Further orders would only come after the Supreme Court ruling, so Biden would be covered by the very same Presidential immunity that Trump just fought for.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago

Bonus points if their orders include the phrase "stand back and stand by".

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

He pretty much has to, or else Trump will imprison him an execute him in the next 12 months.

I mean shit, if I knew there was a fifty percent chance my neighbor would kidnap and murder me in the next year..... I'd be making contingency plans.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Unfortunately that's not how Democrats work. For good or for bad they stick to morality (except when it comes to Israel for God knows what reason) and they'll take the "high road" that just so happens to lead off a cliff, but it's the high road so they need to take it even if it means their certain death.

We're a joke, doomed to die for the sake of the moral high ground that we have no right to even assume we have (see previous Isreal comment.)

Edit: but also, from the article, this isn't the actual desire. They already got what they wanted and that was a delay.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I sort of agree, but at some point, Biden has to understand his own self, and his family, and all the colleagues he has worked with in his career are at risk. Trump is seriously escalating a dangerous game that only SCOTUS or Biden can put an end to. Politics is eventually violence, and Biden must know that.

Trump is hiring expensive, smart people, to argue at the last peaceful authority in the country, that he will regain the power of judge jury and executioner. This is fucking chilling.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

This should help left leaning voters reconsider gun restriction laws since most of them are enforced in blue areas, while red areas are all allowed to have essentially entire armories.

If you live in New York or California, you can't find a gun store within 100 miles of where you live that can only sell extremely restrictive features that would give the most battle hardened Navy Seal issues hitting targets, but in Idaho and Texas there's a gun store on every fucking corner selling easy to shoot highly ergonomic firearms that allow morbidly obese boomers to effortlessly hit the dick off a fly at 1000 meters.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Begging to differ, I'm sitting on my toilet in California and a quick Google shows there's 3 gun stores within 5 miles of me. I'd have to pass the legitimate restrictions (which I easily could) and one of them looks very upscale and expensive, but physical access is not a problem at all.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Fair point, but I'm sure you are only able to be sold a very specific set of authorized firearms, that when compared to what similar stores in other states happen to also sell; will reveal the differences are orders of magnitude.

Case in point: a Cali compliant AR-15 is a horrible thing to shoot (I own this one).

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Watching from an outside of the U.S. perspective, it leaves me speechless seeing how staggering the transition was from 'bastion of democracy and the free world' to 'increasingly malfunctioning society with russian-like values'

[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

America has historically been more hype than substance. The more you learn about our history, the thinner that "Bastion of Democracy and Free World" veneer gets.

We have residents who still remember when it was illegal for black and white people to date. We have "sheriff's gangs" in major cities, who are indistinguishable from the cartels they're supposed to police. We literally still have a torture prison on an island we're functionally at war with, who we can't put on trial because we broke their brains but we can't let go because we're still scared of them.

Dig into the history and you find out about Nixon's CIA sending arms to the Khmer Rouge. You learn about House Majority Leader Tom DeLay's sex trafficking island. You learn about our century of atrocities in Haiti and Guatemala and Panama. You learn about the Tuskegee Experiments. You learn about that time George Bush Sr set up an teenager to sell a DEA agent crack directly outside the White House for the purpose of inflating fears of a drug epidemic.

Just really ugly despicable stuff. And its been happening for a long while.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

It's just bizarre to listen to...

Kagan: If a president sells nuclear secrets to a foreign adversary, is that immune?

Sauer: If it's structured as an official act, he would have to be impeached and convicted first.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

The very next question should have been "And if he has 1/2 of the House of Representatives killed at the same time?"

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

why only half? isn't it more efficient to kill all members of all other branches along with all identified successors?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Because the other half would be his supporters.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

well maybe now but if you want to be sure then double down and clean slate that shit.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 months ago

While you're at it, write an executive order dissolving Congress and establishing the President as a dictator. It's an "official act" so it should be fine, right?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (3 children)

If I'm Biden, as soon as this is okayed, Trump is dead. Right? I mean, fuck.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Obviously, why wouldn't he? This is potentially the dumbest argument ever heard in a court room and we're all supposed to sit here and entertain its plausibility. What a joke.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I know that's what I would do.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago

If the Supreme Court were to greenlight this, it becomes the only logical choice in terms of preservation of the self and the state..

My opponent will use this power for great evil, so I must use it first to circumvent that.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 6 months ago

Biden doesn't have the balls for that...Trump, unfortunetely does (or he's just too fucking stupid to realize the ramifications of it).