Hi I’m Tim.
I’m AuDHD - officially diagnosed ADHD and self-diagnosed (for now) with ASD. I also suffer from a great deal of Imposter Syndrome.
Trump cares about one thing, Trump. If these policies will hurt people he sees as an enemy, he’ll be all for it. He doesn’t want to run a country, or do any work, he wants to be the “strong man” at the top everyone “respects/fears”. He gives zero shits about anyone or anything besides himself. This election is 100% about getting elected to keep himself out of jail, and of course his revenge on everyone trying to hold him accountable for his ever growing crime list.
He doesn’t want to be a part of it, because that’s like work. He’ll be 100% happy to let them do these horrible things and take credit for it later.
Donald Trump has asked a federal judge to freeze the classified documents case against him in light of a Supreme Court ruling this week that said former presidents have broad immunity from prosecution.
I love that it says former presidents, not presidents in general. I also remember the ruling saying that it was immunity for things that fall within the Presidents “official duties”, of which Roberts gave Trump’s team two examples (pardons and AG/DOJ). I wouldn’t call that “broad immunity”. This very well could be something that Roberts and his co-conspirators had in mind for the “presumptive immunity” type of act though, and the fun part is they didn’t define it so they get to rule if it does/doesn’t, super!
He’s running the country right now, unless you think it’s really Obama and/or the Lizard People.
Ah good catch, not sure if I mistyped or mobile auto-correct got me. I think I even looked the word up to make sure I was spelling it correct (I always want to add an “e” on the end). And no rudeness taken on this side, I appreciate it. Thanks! =)
They worded and ruled the way they did, because they know there is a 0% chance Biden would carry out anything he would have to declare immunity for, because he is so worried about being a “both sides” politician. And the SCOTUS didn’t make any of that “the law”, it’s still illegal, BUT the President can now claim immunity for breaking the law and nobody can do anything about it. It plays against the morals of the Left, since the Right sold their morals for power long ago.
And Biden could certainly do something that counters this without having to break the law, and exercise this new immunity. He could be running on expanding the Court, bumping the number to 13 Justices (one Justice for each US federal circuit court), adding new qualified Judges instead of inexperienced partisan hacks. He could run on adding rules on ethics and time limits for the Court, make the members (or a staggered amount of them) do a rotation out and back to one of the 13 US federal circuit court systems every 4 years (or whatever). This would go a long way against this weaponizing of the Court with bad faith Justices that are putting Politics/$ over the country and the law, and it would be all legal.
Roberts did not list the military as one of the “official acts” that would be immune, because Trump doesn’t need the military yet to stay out of jail. The list was a blue print to keeping Trump out of jail should he win the election. The military would however likely fall under what the majority of the SCOTUS would call an action that would have “presumed immunity”, but they really left that up to the SCOTUS to decide on a case by case basis (aka does it help Trump or one of the Justice’s “friends”).
Just as a devils advocate when we talk about replacing Biden at this late stage.
Since the advent of the modern primary election system in 1972, an incumbent president has never been defeated by a primary challenger, though every president who faced a strong primary challenge went on to be defeated in the general election.
Source: Primary challenge
Swapping Biden out to find someone that can poll better than a guy who plans to end elections, setup death camps, take away all reproductive rights (abortion, birth control, IVF), as well as rolling back LGBTQ+ rights, shouldn’t even be an issue. Unless you’re part of the cult, it seems like an easy choice between freedom, or the fall of the Republic.
I personally couldn’t imagine trying to overcome telling a court room of people what I can only imagine is PTSD inducing memories, and then on top of that receiving death threats from Trumps cult. I’m not sure one could have enough years of trauma therapy to overcome that.
It might also be the allegations are 100% true, but the death threats and people trying to destroy your life and those around you might not be worth it. Look how Stormy has been treated when the Cult is out to get you.
He has stated that he wants to pardon everyone for Jan 6th, and will likely pardon anyone willing to be his militia against the Left/immigrants. The Supreme Court has thrown gas on how fast they are going to be able to go through the whole Project 2025 playbook.
Yes, but now he could do it legally (well full immunity making legality mute moot).
The issue this time is that one party still flies at least two of those flags still.
I"m sure the irony is intend on an election on the same day as the US celebration of Independence. =) I watched the John Oliver episode about this election though, and congrats on what looks like Labor being the big winner over the Conservative party.
It blows my mind that people can argue that Trump is the worst possible outcome for our country and the world, and then follow that up with “we need a candidate that can beat Trump”. If everyone knows what is at stake (democracy), how is Biden not capable of beating Trump? Do people think that not voting, or voting 3rd party is going to somehow keep Trump out of the white house? Anything but a vote for Biden (or whoever ends up on the ticket opposite Trump) is who everyone needs to vote for, or they have chosen Trump and doomed us all.
The Chief Justice did give two examples, as a kind of playbook for Trump and the people behind Project 2025. The two things he mentions that for sure fall within the absolute can’t investigate/question/use as evidence/prosecute “official” acts are:
Except that it would be against the law, and it’s hard to contrast yourself with Trump if you are also now committing crimes (even if those crimes are for the bettering of the US). Immunity doesn’t blank your crimes from the public’s minds, and forcefully removing even bad faith Justices from the Supreme Court is not a great look when he has been campaigning on knowing “right from wrong” and respecting the rule of law.
If he isn’t going to, someone on the Left needs to start explaining from the rooftops to everyday people, “here is what this really means” with some crazy examples. And they should also be targeting Trumps own people as well, explaining that this is the power Biden has now, but if Biden is replaced that next (and likely more “radical left”) individual will now have all that power should they win in November. See how they feel about Harris being able to lock any of them up, without due process or even having to charge them, then being able to pardon her DOJ, and all of it would be untouchable.
Or since they love conspiracies, tell them Harris can wait and see who wins the election, and if they lose she could exercise the 25th on Biden, grab the power for herself, and declare Trump and his campaign all be rounded up and it would all be within her new powers and completely untouchable.
He won’t though, because he’s basically a moderate Republican that wants to both sides everything. He’s afraid to offend the same people stabbing him in the back.
I did find the part that listed the military as one of the Presidents office acts, you are correct on that. I also found this on page 62, that is the basis for the questioning about Seal Team 6 during arguments, and again in the SCOTUS descent. I read it as effectively saying that if the President uses police or military to do an “unlawful killing” then because they are “exempt” he would be immune. So the President isn’t allowed to murder in a foreign country, but if he uses the military it’s an official act and exempt? This reads to me like it only stops the President from personally being a Rambo, carrying out hit jobs, but Trump was a draft dodger (so …). Any lawyers here? I don’t see an instance of the President carrying out an “unlawful” killing without using the police or military. Except if maybe this is one of those things left over from when a President would duel, or people in Congress would bludgeon someone with a cane?