SCOTUS

[raison de arizona]

Donald Trump asked for immunity to assassinate his political opponents. Today, the Supreme Court took a big step in his direction.

Like Justice Sotomayor, I fear for our country and the future of democracy.

Watch our full episode.
https://youtu.be/79uRRckWrfs

[raison de arizona]

https://x.com/ElieNYC/status/1807852538579820598

Look, I appreciate that people still want to find *some way* to think that Trump is going to be brought to justice for January 6.

But he WILL NOT be brought to justice. That part of the conversation is OVER. Trump won. People need to deal with that in their own way, but he WON.

The more relevant question is "NOW... WHAT ARE YOU PREPARED TO DO?" Trump won. He iced the bookeeper. He killed Sean Connery. NOW, WHAT ARE YOU PREPARED TO DO?

Are you prepared to go to the mattresses against the Supreme Court? Are you prepared to DEMAND court expansion as a condition for your next vote, in your next primary? Yes? Then we can talk. NO? Then there is no point.

Maybe it's because I'm Black. Maybe it's because I'm a Mets fan. But, like, SOMETIMES WE LOSE. Often, even. MORE OFTEN THAN NOT, THE BAD GUYS WIN.

They won today. Now, what are you prepared to do?

[raison de arizona]

https://x.com/hugolowell/status/1807896768459559229

New: President Biden will deliver remarks on the Supreme Court's immunity ruling at 7:45pm, per White House

[Dr. Ken]

Donald Trump asked for immunity to assassinate his political opponents. Today, the Supreme Court took a big step in his direction.

Like Justice Sotomayor, I fear for our country and the future of democracy.

Watch our full episode.
https://youtu.be/79uRRckWrfs

There was talk about how he wanted to kill protesters and kill the leaker of him running to the bunker. Now there's nothing really stopping him from doing so if he wins

[Dr. Ken]

Wow, bet this guy feels pretty dumb about now.

Mitch McConnell, Feb. 2021: “Trump is still liable for everything he did while he was in office…We have a criminal justice system in this country. We have civil litigation and former presidents are not immune from being held accountable by either one”

Both alito and Kavanaugh during their confirmation pretended they were adamant about the president not being above the law and not having this kind of immunity

[New Turtle]

Stop electing assholes
Fill the executive branch with non-assholes
Fill the Congress with non-assholes
Nominate and confirm non-assholes to the judicial branch who want to be there.

[sugar magnolia]

https://x.com/ElieNYC/status/1807852538579820598

Look, I appreciate that people still want to find *some way* to think that Trump is going to be brought to justice for January 6.

But he WILL NOT be brought to justice. That part of the conversation is OVER. Trump won. People need to deal with that in their own way, but he WON.

The more relevant question is "NOW... WHAT ARE YOU PREPARED TO DO?" Trump won. He iced the bookeeper. He killed Sean Connery. NOW, WHAT ARE YOU PREPARED TO DO?

Are you prepared to go to the mattresses against the Supreme Court? Are you prepared to DEMAND court expansion as a condition for your next vote, in your next primary? Yes? Then we can talk. NO? Then there is no point.

Maybe it's because I'm Black. Maybe it's because I'm a Mets fan. But, like, SOMETIMES WE LOSE. Often, even. MORE OFTEN THAN NOT, THE BAD GUYS WIN.

They won today. Now, what are you prepared to do?

"Brought to justice" for me would be if the motherfucker got nailed by a garbage truck and spent the next many, many more years of his life in constant pain, unable to speak and incontinent.

[John Thomas8]

"Brought to justice" for me would be if the motherfucker got nailed by a garbage truck and spent the next many, many more years of his life in constant pain, unable to speak and incontinent.

[raison de arizona]

GEN (Ret.) Mark Milley says what EVERYONE who's ever served should be saying right now:

"We don't take an oath to a king or queen or tyrant...We don't take an oath to a wannabe dictator. We take an oath to the Constitution!"

[sugar magnolia]

"Brought to justice" for me would be if the motherfucker got nailed by a garbage truck and spent the next many, many more years of his life in constant pain, unable to speak and incontinent.

I have GOT to watch that movie one day.

[Slim Cognito]

It's THE BESTEST EVAH!!!!!

[sugar magnolia]

It's THE BESTEST EVAH!!!!!

So I've heard, but the last time I was able to sit through a movie was at least 3 decades ago. I finally gave up trying.

[raison de arizona]

Yes. He can also command the IRS to go after the assets of the Washington Post or New York Times if they criticize him. The slightly more benign model here is the way in which Viktor Orban has used a pliant court to go after enemies and distort democracy. Then there is the Putin model.

Question for legal experts: Does this from SCOTUS's ruling mean that in a second term, Trump can command the Justice Department to prosecute anyone at all without any factual basis whatsoever, while knowing he will enjoy absolute immunity for it after leaving office?

[raison de arizona]

Sheesh. As if any US President would accept bribes for pardons.
https://x.com/CREWcrew/status/1807912209055392049

The Supreme Court has effectively just ruled that a president could accept a $500,000 bribe to pardon someone.

Because the pardon power is a core constitutional function, that means the president has absolute immunity from prosecution for accepting that bribe.

[sugar magnolia]

So does this mean that his immunity powers are stronger than our laws? If he orders his DOJ to do something that is patently illegal, and they follow his orders, will they be held to the laws even though he has immunity? If they disregard his illegal order, can he then mete out some sort of punishment to them?

Orders his DOJ to shoot someone on 5th Ave.
They do it.
They get caught.
Then?????...

Or...
They refuse to do it...
trump gets pissed off and orders them beheaded (or fired, or whatever)....
Then???...

[raison de arizona]

So does this mean that his immunity powers are stronger than our laws? If he orders his DOJ to do something that is patently illegal, and they follow his orders, will they be held to the laws even though he has immunity? If they disregard his illegal order, can he then mete out some sort of punishment to them?

Orders his DOJ to shoot someone on 5th Ave.
They do it.
They get caught.
Then?????...

He can just pardon them, no?

Or...
They refuse to do it...
trump gets pissed off and orders them beheaded (or fired, or whatever)....
Then???...

One of the examples in SCOTUS case was ordering Seal Team Six to assassinate someone, I think this one is A-OK.


https://x.com/MarkHertling/status/1807909716175057003

As a former military guy, I’m trying to figure out how a commander can refuse an illegal order from someone who is issuing it as an official act.

[raison de arizona]

Elie Mystal, much like the rest of us, is having A Day.
https://x.com/ElieNYC/status/1807818986395951190

By the way, everybody who has been pushing this narrative that the Conservative court was somehow "moderate" and there's a 3-3-3 split with Roberts, Brett & Amy being reasonable need to form a line behind me to kiss my black ass.

[raison de arizona]

https://twitter.com/tribelaw/status/1807936604624826608

Of the 6-Justice majority in today’s terrible immunity decision, two justices (Thomas, Alito) were violating federal law (28 USC 455) by not recusing from the case and three (Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Barrett) were appointed by the man whom the decision essentially immunized. Hmmm.

28 U.S. Code § 455 - Disqualification of justice, judge, or magistrate judge
(a)Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/455

They are breaking the law. The executive, and the executive branch enforce the law. Why not arrest Alito and Thomas, if not the other three as well, declare their seats vacant, and replace them? Surely that is within the newfound powers of the executive in their official duties?

[RTH10260]

Sheesh. As if any US President would accept bribes gratuities for pardons.
https://x.com/CREWcrew/status/1807912209055392049

The Supreme Court has effectively just ruled that a president could accept a $500,000 bribe to pardon someone.

Because the pardon power is a core constitutional function, that means the president has absolute immunity from prosecution for accepting that bribe.

FIFY

[AndyinPA]

I wonder how James Comey is feeling today?

[RTH10260]

A follow-up Question
(to the third)

How illegal must an order by a POTUS now be that government employees can reject to perform it without getting harmed, how will performing it get them excused in court from doing it? Especially when it's the Commander-in-Chief? Is only the POTUS in person protectected or are assisting persons too?

[raison de arizona]

A follow-up Question
(to the third)

How illegal must an order by a POTUS now be that government employees can reject to perform it without getting harmed, how will performing it get them excused in court from doing it? Especially when it's the Commander-in-Chief? Is only the POTUS in person protectected or are assisting persons too?

Dude. Have you been listening? If POTUS gives an order, IT'S NOT ILLEGAL. Period.

ETA: I want to see drone strikes on Mar-a-Lago. Posthaste.

[raison de arizona]

Geez, I was worried there for a hot minute.

Easier said than done? Would you like to revisit that, Politico?

[raison de arizona]

https://x.com/TeaPainUSA/status/1807832786167890101

TRUMP: "I can shoot someone on 5th Avenue and get away with it."

SCOTUS: "Here, use our gun."

[bob]

A follow-up Question
(to the third)

How illegal must an order by a POTUS now be that government employees can reject to perform it without getting harmed, how will performing it get them excused in court from doing it? Especially when it's the Commander-in-Chief? Is only the POTUS in person protectected or are assisting persons too?

Dude. Have you been listening? If POTUS gives an order, IT'S NOT ILLEGAL. Period.

That's the point being made here:

As a former military guy, I’m trying to figure out how a commander can refuse an illegal order from someone who is issuing it as an official act.

"The president told me to murder babies. The president isn't going to be prosecuted if I do that, but I will be prosecuted if I do that. And if I refuse to murder babies, the president will have me murdered. And the president won't be prosecuted for having me murdered. So ... murder babies?"

Or, slightly more lightheartedly:

Terry Lakin: "I refuse to deploy because President Obama isn't really the president."

Obama: "Hang Lakin from the nearest yardarm."