Or was this a planned event, but it's not going to lead to a decision being made?
Or are we all surprised to hear this, this morning?
Moderators: LawBeefaroni, $iljanus
Or was this a planned event, but it's not going to lead to a decision being made?
I will admit that these questions/discussions that are being put to the prosecution lawyer are more concerning to me as well, but earlier the discussion with the defense seemed to constantly put his position in a sour light.
The crux of the argument is that it's up to Congress to decide - they must impeach based on conduct, right? Specifically, if Congress doesn't or won't impeach, it's not up to the courts to decide guilt or innocence.
The argument I keep hearing again and again from the conservatives is that if the President doesn’t have immunity, it will lead to an endless series of politically motivated bogus prosecutions. They are making a slippery slope argument.
They have until 6/30/24 to release their written opinion, right?
This is pretty much how I see it, too, after listening to the arguments. I was floored that Trump's arguments about immunity were being taken seriously by this court. I think if they go the way it's looking, this is going to be the nail in the coffin for the Roberts Court's legitimacy. Unreal that we've reached this point.Dogstar wrote: ↑Thu Apr 25, 2024 1:05 pm This was more of a mixed-bag than I was expecting (I was expecting 7-2 because we don't have kings here). There was concern about prosecutorial overreach, which was noted above, which doesn't seem to be a concern elsewhere, as the rest of us can't seem to do much about that if we encounter that problem (as prosecutors currently have immunity and their decisions have limited review). There was concern about distinguishing between an official and a private act. There was Alito's staggering assertion that immunity is an incentive for presidents to leave office peacefully. There was Trump's lawyer's assertion that coups and assassinations could possibly be official acts -- and I'm not sure how you'd prosecute that either, as other have noted, because if you round up all the people that might impeach you, you've solved that problem for yourself.
There are anywhere from 3-5 votes for some type of immunity judging from the oral arguments. That feels insane, and I hope that I'm wrong. Trying to kick it to Congress to determine what's an official act, given how non-functional Congress is, feels like dereliction of duty, even if I can understand the Court stating that it's not its job to do so.
Absent a swift 9-0, 8-1, or 7-2 decision against presidential immunity, this is going to further erode public trust in the Supreme Court as a non-political unbiased institution. And if there is Presidential immunity? I just don't know.
SCOTUS: The president does not have the power to forgive student loans under this particular law.
TRUMP: OK, but he could order someone killed, though, right?
Former president. And JFK never had the fortune of being a former president. Nevemind the whole domestic vs. foreign coup thing.
lol - yeah, I'm sure he does not like the implications.waitingtoconnect wrote: ↑Thu Apr 25, 2024 7:16 pm And what do you do as a Supreme Court justice if your wife was connected with said coup in some way?
Maybe Blinken should throw his name in the hat?
I don't think they understand how *kings* work.
I spend an unhealthy amount of time paying attention to Christian Nationalism, and I now expect that Monarchy will be their next ambition.
My thought that we have a better than average chance at a second Civil War, or at least widespread political violence, hasn't really changed.Holman wrote: ↑Tue Apr 30, 2024 7:02 pmI spend an unhealthy amount of time paying attention to Christian Nationalism, and I now expect that Monarchy will be their next ambition.
Up to now they have spent a lot of time trying to persuade themselves that the Founding Fathers were enamored of the Old Testament and that they modeled the Constitution on it directly. (Really.) There's literally no plausible foundation for this, either in the Founders' writings or in the Bible, but there are preacher/prophet/pundits building whole careers on the claim, and some of them are deeply involved with TrumpWorld.
The next and much smoother step will be just to insist that democracy itself is un-Biblical and that God's establishment of a theocratic monarchy in Biblical times (King Solomon, King David, etc), supported by an official Priestly class, is the only proper form of government.
Given everything they say about Christian supremacy already, I can think of no reason why they would hold back from this option when it becomes available.
Perhaps they view Trump as a Saul or David like figure?Holman wrote: ↑Tue Apr 30, 2024 7:02 pmI spend an unhealthy amount of time paying attention to Christian Nationalism, and I now expect that Monarchy will be their next ambition.
Up to now they have spent a lot of time trying to persuade themselves that the Founding Fathers were enamored of the Old Testament and that they modeled the Constitution on it directly. (Really.) There's literally no plausible foundation for this, either in the Founders' writings or in the Bible, but there are preacher/prophet/pundits building whole careers on the claim, and some of them are deeply involved with TrumpWorld.
The next and much smoother step will be just to insist that democracy itself is un-Biblical and that God's establishment of a theocratic monarchy in Biblical times (King Solomon, King David, etc), supported by an official Priestly class, is the only proper form of government.
Given everything they say about Christian supremacy already, I can think of no reason why they would hold back from this option when it becomes available.
I don't see the 2nd civil war (at this point) but the widespread political violence temperature keeps going up and as much as I hate hate hate to say it but that's part of temp rising... On both sides... No one wants to back down, which is expected, but very few want to talk it through any more (myself included).
The only thing I don't see even a small possibility of happening is de-escalation. But I think the nature, tempo, and type of future escalations depend very much on who gets elected in November, which isn't exactly stunning analysis. I look at the Civil War movie and what was depicted, and I think it was too tame/too limited in what it envisioned in terms of non-military action, should things elevate to confrontation.LordMortis wrote: ↑Wed May 01, 2024 6:51 am I don't see the 2nd civil war (at this point) but the widespread political violence temperature keeps going up and as much as I hate hate hate to say it but that's part of temp rising... On both sides... No one wants to back down, which is expected, but very few want to talk it through any more (myself included).
If Trump gets elected, all bets are off. With his stated agenda, he may very well want a Civil War. If Biden is elected, I expect a lot of angry Truth Social posts and the FBI finding a few more militia cells, but otherwise nothing.LordMortis wrote: ↑Wed May 01, 2024 6:51 amI don't see the 2nd civil war (at this point) but the widespread political violence temperature keeps going up and as much as I hate hate hate to say it but that's part of temp rising... On both sides... No one wants to back down, which is expected, but very few want to talk it through any more (myself included).
Running__ | __2014: 1300.55 miles__ | __2015: 2036.13 miles__ | __2016: 1012.75 miles__ | __2017: 1105.82 miles__ | __2018: 1318.91 miles | __2019: 2000.00 miles |
Oh, that's a central trope of Christian Nationalist MAGA. They compare him to David all the time.waitingtoconnect wrote: ↑Tue Apr 30, 2024 10:10 pm Perhaps they view Trump as a Saul or David like figure?
In 2016, Jerry Falwell Jr. said that “God called King David a man after God’s own heart even though he was an adulterer and a murderer.”
MAGA logic is that all of Trump's crimes must be ignored and forgiven because he is God's chosen leader. David was apparently a sucker.Of course David was held responsible by God and accepted punishment and guilt for his crimes.