Members Suckrates Posted July 5 Members Posted July 5 Think for a moment how heinous and corrupt the Supreme courts decision of Presidential immunity is. They took a position that noone knew existed for ANYONE in America (absolute immunity), created it for Trump and made it "retroactive" so that all Trumps actions surrounding Jan 6th AND classified docs would be immune from prosecution. They basically are shielding and protecting him from any prosecution for any of his illegal actions, in any of his indictments, while aiding and abetting his current run for office, The 6 conservative members of the court must be removed from the court and indicted along with Trump for "conspiracy to defraud America"..... This new ruling is nothing more than a pre-conceived plot by the Court, Heritage Foundation and others to make Trump President. The unanimous ruling by the 6 conservative members "without a single Dissent" shows their blatant and unified participation in the huge plot to elect Trump... If that isnt "teamwork", I dont know what is.... They could have made the same decision "from this day going forth" which would leave Trump vulnerable to prosecution, but NO, they didnt. They are making sure he is protected and untouchable, and for that THEY are guilty. The Supreme Court is the NEW American Mob family..... If we get out of this mess, by electing a Democratic President, there needs to be MAJOR COURT REFORM, with a reversal of the absolute immunity clause, and a rework of the Court with equal numbers of BOTH parties sitting. America is a country of all men created equal, with no man above the law, not even a lawless, immoral, unethical man named TRUMP. But, we also need to keep shaming the Court in the media and making their decision VERGONIA when we go to the ballots. Dems MUST be elected to all offices so they can control the House, Senate and Presidency, and kick the asses of the GOP... There is no other choice to be made at this juncture of American history. Bingo T Dog, Lucky and stevenkesslar 3 Quote
Moses Posted July 5 Posted July 5 1 hour ago, Suckrates said: They took a position that noone knew existed for ANYONE in America (absolute immunity), created it for Trump and made it "retroactive" so that all Trumps actions surrounding Jan 6th AND classified docs would be immune from prosecution. This is nonsense. Presidential immunity exists from early days of US. First case when presidential immunity was implemented in real life dated 1867 (Mississippi v. Johnson). Besides Trump this privilege was used by Nixon (1971, 1973, 1978) and Clinton (1994). Presidential immunity is part of system of separated powers. Quote
Members Suckrates Posted July 5 Author Members Posted July 5 3 hours ago, Moses said: This is nonsense. Presidential immunity exists from early days of US. First case when presidential immunity was implemented in real life dated 1867 (Mississippi v. Johnson). Besides Trump this privilege was used by Nixon (1971, 1973, 1978) and Clinton (1994). Presidential immunity is part of system of separated powers. Excuse me Sir, NOT absolute Presidential immunity,,,,,, Perhaps in your country the Presidents can kill whomever for whatever without reason or explanation, but not in America.... Our country has now adopted a Putin inspired law but this will not sit well with the American people. stevenkesslar and Bingo T Dog 2 Quote
Members Suckrates Posted July 5 Author Members Posted July 5 How can anyone here, or in America for that matter feel safe having Trump in the white House. He can now trade and sell military secrets to our enemies with gay abandon, for his own personal financial advantage. without accountability or repercussions ? He did it before knowing it was illegal, so imagine what he does now knowing, as Sotomayor says he is "IMMUNE".... A second term as President will allow Trump to amass a huge illegally gained fortune. Justice Roberts is a fucking maniac for thinking any of these extreme scenarios being cited are hypothetical for Trump, especially with an insane political plan laid out in Project 2025. As Whoopie Goldberg would say "you in danger Gurl !" stevenkesslar and Bingo T Dog 2 Quote
Moses Posted July 5 Posted July 5 7 hours ago, Suckrates said: Perhaps in your country the Presidents can kill whomever for whatever without reason or explanation, but not in America.... Our country has now adopted a Putin inspired law but this will not sit well with the American people. In your country even cops may kill "without reason"... You already forgot BLM? Speaking about presidential immunity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidential_immunity_in_the_United_States Quote
Members stevenkesslar Posted July 5 Members Posted July 5 11 hours ago, Moses said: Besides Trump this privilege was used by Nixon (1971, 1973, 1978) Sweetie, I think you forgot 1974. Had this radical SCOTUS and its pro-authoritarianism ruling been in place then, Nixon would never have had to resign. The radical hand-picked Trump SCOTUS members are increasingly anti-democracy and pro-authoritarian MAGA folk. Quote
Moses Posted July 5 Posted July 5 8 minutes ago, stevenkesslar said: Sweetie, I think you forgot 1974. Had this radical SCOTUS and its pro-authoritarianism ruling been in place then, Nixon would never have had to resign. Be that as it may, Nixon enjoyed immunity and remained unpunished; there was no criminal prosecution. Quote
Bingo T Dog Posted July 5 Posted July 5 4 minutes ago, Moses said: Be that as it may, Nixon enjoyed immunity and remained unpunished; there was no criminal prosecution. Quote
Members stevenkesslar Posted July 5 Members Posted July 5 20 minutes ago, Moses said: Be that as it may, Nixon enjoyed immunity and remained unpunished; there was no criminal prosecution. In other words, you conceded my point. Thank you. I'm not a lawyer, let alone a SCOTUS justice. And we'll never know for sure what would have happened had this radical ruling been in place. But an example that has been cited would be the tapes that ended up indicting Nixon and forcing his resignation could have been shielded as "official" acts under an "absolute immunity" interpretation of the radical pro-authoritarian ruling of Trump's hand-picked radical "Justices". If they can even be called that after backing authoritarian injustice like brutally beating the shit out of cops to suspend a democratic transfer of power. Quote
Moses Posted July 5 Posted July 5 48 minutes ago, stevenkesslar said: you conceded my point No, I agreed with what I originally stated: Nixon is a prime example of the use of presidential immunity. The fact that he quit doesn't matter. It is important that he was not punished for his actions. stevenkesslar 1 Quote
Members stevenkesslar Posted July 5 Members Posted July 5 3 minutes ago, Moses said: The fact that he quit doesn't matter. You really don't understand democracy, do you? Only someone who lives under the rule of a murderous tyrant like Putin would argue that. Quote
Moses Posted July 5 Posted July 5 31 minutes ago, stevenkesslar said: Only someone who lives under the rule of a murderous tyrant like Putin would argue that. Why all "pro-Dems" when they have no arguments, starting to talk about poster personality? Is it infection like COVID? You don't understand how law works. - Biden is too old to be president - Putin is murderer... bla-bla-bla... - Biden has cognitive and speech problems - Russia is...bla-bla-bla... Could you please focus your mind on topic? Presidential immunity. stevenkesslar 1 Quote
Members Suckrates Posted July 6 Author Members Posted July 6 Immunity is really not a conversation Americans can have with Russian sympathizers, whose leader is absolutely IMMUNE from every horrid, despicable, act of humanity under the sun.. The gentleman doesnt seem to grasp the DIFFERENCE between being Immune, and being ABSOLUTELY immune in our culture, being that liiving under a deadly dictator is so ingrained in every fiber of his being. . I would only venture to have any conversation with Mr Moses on level playing fields. stevenkesslar 1 Quote
Moses Posted July 6 Posted July 6 5 hours ago, Suckrates said: Russian sympathizers 5 hours ago, Suckrates said: being that liiving under a deadly dictator is so ingrained in every fiber of his being 7 hours ago, Moses said: all "pro-Dems" when they have no arguments, starting to talk about poster personality Looks like it is in "pro-Dems" culture... Oh, did I just call it culture? It's probably correct to call it "lack of culture" Quote
Members Suckrates Posted September 14 Author Members Posted September 14 Is it only me that notices that since Biden exited the race, Supreme Court reform has NOT been mentioned ? Biden introduced this before he dropped out, but Kamala, has NOT mentioned it since she took the nomination. Her stump speech is pretty solid, and I have heard it many times, so many times that I could probably give the speech myself if I were on stage but I cannot remember the mention of Court reform, which is an issue supported by a huge majority of the country. It can probably help her slightly if she included it, or was it just a frivolous talking point for Biden to earn brownie points while he was running ? If that is the case, it solidifies the belief that politicians will say ANYTHING to get elected, even things they have no intention of implementing, and THATS a big problem. . Quote
