So... Is SCOTUS really corrupt enough to hand Trump the country?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What worries me about the SCOTUS is what blackmail material exists for them. We know Kavanaugh has some skeletons in his closet as does Thomas. Hell, we know Thomas is being bankrolled.

I'd like to think they are all bigger thinkers than the moment, but then they handed down that decision last summer giving the President virtual immunity and if that wasn't shortsighted, I'm not sure what is.

I read that ruling as assuming that Harris would win. It wasn't shortsighted, it was long sighted, thinking of a long lasting framework that would apply to all presidents with a baseline level of integrity and/or patriotism along with the obligatory narcissism, ambition, and self-centeredness that the role entails. Unfortunately, neither Trump nor Musk have that baseline level.

I hate what trunp is doing but that was basic executive immunity. You can't have states hauling the president off to jail. The answer to presidential crimes is an impeachment. If you can't impact then there isn't the political will to remove the president.

We can no more put Trump in jail for exercising his legitimate power because we don't like it, than we can put any of the prior presidents in jail because some state didn't like what they did.

The insurrection was not presidential power. I am willing to give the president a lot of leeway for crossing lines while performing his duties in service to the country, a lot more than many. But attempting to overturn an election is in direct opposition to the president's powers and duty. He should have been charged with sedition and convicted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What worries me about the SCOTUS is what blackmail material exists for them. We know Kavanaugh has some skeletons in his closet as does Thomas. Hell, we know Thomas is being bankrolled.

I'd like to think they are all bigger thinkers than the moment, but then they handed down that decision last summer giving the President virtual immunity and if that wasn't shortsighted, I'm not sure what is.

I read that ruling as assuming that Harris would win. It wasn't shortsighted, it was long sighted, thinking of a long lasting framework that would apply to all presidents with a baseline level of integrity and/or patriotism along with the obligatory narcissism, ambition, and self-centeredness that the role entails. Unfortunately, neither Trump nor Musk have that baseline level.

I hate what trunp is doing but that was basic executive immunity. You can't have states hauling the president off to jail. The answer to presidential crimes is an impeachment. If you can't impact then there isn't the political will to remove the president.

We can no more put Trump in jail for exercising his legitimate power because we don't like it, than we can put any of the prior presidents in jail because some state didn't like what they did.

The insurrection was not presidential power. I am willing to give the president a lot of leeway for crossing lines while performing his duties in service to the country, a lot more than many. But attempting to overturn an election is in direct opposition to the president's powers and duty. He should have been charged with sedition and convicted.

💯

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What worries me about the SCOTUS is what blackmail material exists for them. We know Kavanaugh has some skeletons in his closet as does Thomas. Hell, we know Thomas is being bankrolled.

I'd like to think they are all bigger thinkers than the moment, but then they handed down that decision last summer giving the President virtual immunity and if that wasn't shortsighted, I'm not sure what is.

I read that ruling as assuming that Harris would win. It wasn't shortsighted, it was long sighted, thinking of a long lasting framework that would apply to all presidents with a baseline level of integrity and/or patriotism along with the obligatory narcissism, ambition, and self-centeredness that the role entails. Unfortunately, neither Trump nor Musk have that baseline level.

I hate what trunp is doing but that was basic executive immunity. You can't have states hauling the president off to jail. The answer to presidential crimes is an impeachment. If you can't impact then there isn't the political will to remove the president.

We can no more put Trump in jail for exercising his legitimate power because we don't like it, than we can put any of the prior presidents in jail because some state didn't like what they did.

The insurrection was not presidential power. I am willing to give the president a lot of leeway for crossing lines while performing his duties in service to the country, a lot more than many. But attempting to overturn an election is in direct opposition to the president's powers and duty. He should have been charged with sedition and convicted.

At best he should have been allowed to retire in France, Ireland, or wherever and do the Elba thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What worries me about the SCOTUS is what blackmail material exists for them. We know Kavanaugh has some skeletons in his closet as does Thomas. Hell, we know Thomas is being bankrolled.

I'd like to think they are all bigger thinkers than the moment, but then they handed down that decision last summer giving the President virtual immunity and if that wasn't shortsighted, I'm not sure what is.

I read that ruling as assuming that Harris would win. It wasn't shortsighted, it was long sighted, thinking of a long lasting framework that would apply to all presidents with a baseline level of integrity and/or patriotism along with the obligatory narcissism, ambition, and self-centeredness that the role entails. Unfortunately, neither Trump nor Musk have that baseline level.

I hate what trunp is doing but that was basic executive immunity. You can't have states hauling the president off to jail. The answer to presidential crimes is an impeachment. If you can't impact then there isn't the political will to remove the president.

We can no more put Trump in jail for exercising his legitimate power because we don't like it, than we can put any of the prior presidents in jail because some state didn't like what they did.

The insurrection was not presidential power. I am willing to give the president a lot of leeway for crossing lines while performing his duties in service to the country, a lot more than many. But attempting to overturn an election is in direct opposition to the president's powers and duty. He should have been charged with sedition and convicted.

They didn't give him immunity for insurrection.