Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd be fascinated to see how this court would rule under a radical progressive president who attempts to assassinate his opponents and openly take bribes. I am also tired of justices pretending they're historians and have any good thumb on the history of this country-follow plain text if you want to be originalists but don't conjure up convenient analyses of history

Neither of these actions is covered by this ruling. Those are not "official" duties. Those are crimes, regardless of who is doing them.

Not according to the SCOTUS. Read the decision.

I did.
Those are NOT official duties.
And, to the pp above who thinks Joe Biden could assassinate Justices - that is such crap. That is NOT an official act. At all.
And, as far as trying to throw DJT in jail - that is actually what is happening now. Have you not been paying attention?

Before today, no one citizen of our nation was above the law. Now the President is. Like a King. Have you not been paying attention?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem is the constitution never said it forbids abortion restrictions in 1972. Judges made it up.

Judges make stuff up I guess.

Republican judges make stuff up to protect the powerful.

You disagree with their interpretation of the law. Eh, it happens.

The judges in 1973 literally made up Roe vs Wade out of thin air.

Ok sure. These judges are special, not like those 1973 judges.

Yes, SCOTUS today didn’t make up a law complete with breakdown of regulations by trimester. Why is this all confusing to you? Interpreting the constitution isn’t making up legislation.

The SCOTUS today made up a law that gives absolute immunity to the president.

Totally bizarre reading of the opinion. Today, SCOTUS took away absolute immunity for various specified circumstances. Including an insurrection.

There was never absolute immunity for anyone, including the president. So conferring any immunity at all is a loss for the American people.

There was almost absolute immunity for Hunter, though. Darn judge!

Except there wasn't though. And Hunter was never the President, so it's different. But you know that already.

This week the SCOTUS has dealt a death blow to American democracy. Our ancestors are rolling over in their graves. What a tragic day for America.

All I know is that Joe better give Hunter a pardon on all his federal charges as he exits the White House. Pardon Hunter.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd be fascinated to see how this court would rule under a radical progressive president who attempts to assassinate his opponents and openly take bribes. I am also tired of justices pretending they're historians and have any good thumb on the history of this country-follow plain text if you want to be originalists but don't conjure up convenient analyses of history

Neither of these actions is covered by this ruling. Those are not "official" duties. Those are crimes, regardless of who is doing them.

Not according to the SCOTUS. Read the decision.

I did.
Those are NOT official duties.
And, to the pp above who thinks Joe Biden could assassinate Justices - that is such crap. That is NOT an official act. At all.
And, as far as trying to throw DJT in jail - that is actually what is happening now. Have you not been paying attention?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem is the constitution never said it forbids abortion restrictions in 1972. Judges made it up.

Judges make stuff up I guess.

Fortunately we have a court that rectified that mistake.

A court with judges? Please.

A judge interprets the law. He doesn’t make it.

Not anymore. After Chevron, Judges will be making administrative rules. After today, judges will define what is and is not considered "official acts" of the president.

And most of those judges were screened and selected by the Heritage Foundation. How do you think they will rule?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd be fascinated to see how this court would rule under a radical progressive president who attempts to assassinate his opponents and openly take bribes. I am also tired of justices pretending they're historians and have any good thumb on the history of this country-follow plain text if you want to be originalists but don't conjure up convenient analyses of history

Neither of these actions is covered by this ruling. Those are not "official" duties. Those are crimes, regardless of who is doing them.

Not according to the SCOTUS. Read the decision.

Biden is speaking on this decision tonight. Wonder how many lies he will tell about what this ruling covers?

Anonymous wrote:I'd be fascinated to see how this court would rule under a radical progressive president who attempts to assassinate his opponents and openly take bribes. I am also tired of justices pretending they're historians and have any good thumb on the history of this country-follow plain text if you want to be originalists but don't conjure up convenient analyses of history

So, can Biden now order the assassination of the right-wing SCOTUS judges? With no criminal consequences? It would be an official act.
And can Biden arrest DJT and throw him in jail for lying and every other damn crime he's committed? Biden has total immunity. He can do any damn thing he wants.

Can Biden cancel the election and declare himself the winner, and dictate who can succeed him? Why not? He has total immunity!! Can Biden arrest and throw the oligarchs in jail (they are the ones who funded this right-wing SCOTUS) and leave them there to rot permanently?

There's so much GOOD Biden can do now that he has total immunity from criminal prosecution for the rest of his life!! And that total immunity will be conferred on whomever succeeds him. He can pick Jamie Raskin (my choice), and Jamie can do whatever he wants with the right-wing nutcases and oligarchs, (exile them to Siberia) and he can make Bernie Sanders v-p and together they can remake the entire government of the US, and jail all the polluting corporate presidents and their corrupt oligarch board members!! It could be really, really fun! Outlaw gas-powered vehicles starting TODAY!! Shut down every coal-powered power plant in the country, TODAY!! End fracking TODAY. No more drilling for oil in perpetuity. He can do whatever he wants to do!! Now and forever he is immune from any prosecution. But #1, put the SCOTUS right-wing cabal in JAIL. TODAY!!!

Anonymous wrote:I'd be fascinated to see how this court would rule under a radical progressive president who attempts to assassinate his opponents and openly take bribes. I am also tired of justices pretending they're historians and have any good thumb on the history of this country-follow plain text if you want to be originalists but don't conjure up convenient analyses of history

Neither of these actions is covered by this ruling. Those are not "official" duties. Those are crimes, regardless of who is doing them.

Anonymous wrote:Never in my wildest dreams did I think the SCOTUS would give Trump unlimited Presidential power. We are now officially a fascist country. The right-wing oligarchs have won. They played the long game, and they are victorious.

They didn't. You are uninformed regarding the decision.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DCUM is so twisted they don't realize the court just protected Biden, not the other way around.

I don't care who they protected; the concept of no man being above the law has gone right out the window.

Yes, and I do not know how anyone can now sit as a juror in a criminal case and convict someone for burglary, robbery, fraud, drugs, anything. If a president is above the law, there is no law.

If you are still believing that a president is above the law, you haven't read or heard an intelligent summary of the decision.
You want a president to be open to prosecution for official duties? You think Obama should be prosecuted for droning an American citizen to death? You think Joe should be prosecuted for his lack of oversight of our southern border?

Never in my wildest dreams did I think the SCOTUS would give Trump unlimited Presidential power. We are now officially a fascist country. The right-wing oligarchs have won. They played the long game, and they are victorious.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DCUM is so twisted they don't realize the court just protected Biden, not the other way around.

I don't care who they protected; the concept of no man being above the law has gone right out the window.

Yes, and I do not know how anyone can now sit as a juror in a criminal case and convict someone for burglary, robbery, fraud, drugs, anything. If a president is above the law, there is no law.

So are all the J6ers free now? This is utter insanity.