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.
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 …
Luckily the EPA now has no power to do anything about it either, all but guaranteeing it gets worse before it ever gets better.
Biden is just old, and the cold did him no favors. He was also I think completely unprepared for the firehose of just straight up disprovable lies coming at him while also trying to actually convey his talking points. Even if well I don’t think it’s a great medium for an 81 yr old man. Listen to him elsewhere though and it’s clear he still has his marbles, unlike Trump who is on a fast decline and unable to even explain an idea. The man isn’t as young as he was clearly, and probably should have just retired long ago. But having known family and others with dementia, I don’t think Biden has dementia at all, he’s just old and debates like an 81 yr old.
Right, only the modern interpretation of an original text that very few people in the world has even seen, let alone able to read. And then all the MANY offshoots of Christianity because each had something people didn’t like, a “leader” made a new “version” for them. Forced indoctrination like this is very similar to starting a cult, as almost all of those start with someone that needs to interpret the text or “God’s” word.
I think it would be an interesting exercise for everyone pushing this to have to compare and contrast with say David Koresh, or Joseph Smith, and explain how their version of God’s word isn’t a cult.
Reading the Memorandum, it doesn’t specify what Bible is to be used. Perhaps malicious compliance uses a “alternative” version?
Also found this from the Satanic Temple (who hopefully is on top of this) -
If a public school permits the distribution of religious materials to the student body, they have opened a limited public forum and are obligated to allow religious materials from other faiths. This principle applies to other forms of school-sponsored religious expression as well.
Also funny how these hypocrites go on and on about indoctrination, and then want to indoctrinate every kid in the state by law.
If you go back further though, translation of the text to a language the “people” could understand was illegal. Anyone caught with such texts was imprisoned or worse. Those in charge and using religion to control the masses (it’s true intention IMHO) didn’t want everyone to be able to read it, they wanted people depending on the “chosen” to teach and judge them (what today we may call a cult).
I think it’s a bit of a dog whistle as well.
“Their taking Black jobs, and their taking Hispanic jobs …”
“What exactly is a Black or Hispanic job Mr. Trump?” should have been the follow up on that one.
Why bother? What drugs are we hoping to find and be like “gotcha!”, that’s why he had such a convincing word salad about magnets, windmills, sharks, and batteries when asked about his plan for a future term.
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.