Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

SCOTUS: sponsored by Harlan Crow

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Slap Shot
    replied
    But of course:

    SCOTUS Chief Justice’s 2005 Comments About Presidential Immunity Resurface

    Shortly after Supreme Court Justice John Roberts ruled in favor of giving Donald Trump immunity for crimes committed in an official capacity, an old clip resurfaced online of him saying during his 2005 Senate confirmation that the president is “fully bound” by the law and the Constitution. At the time, Roberts affirmed that not even the president is “above the law under our system.” The clip appears to contradict Monday’s 6-3 Supreme Court decision that Trump has immunity from some criminal prosecution for his role in attempting to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election. Social media users were quick to call out the justice’s hypocrisy, with some asking if the Supreme Court itself is bound by the law.
    btw - not the exact right thread, but thanks to Taraji P. Henson Project 2025 has been trending in Google and social media.

    Leave a comment:


  • St. Clown
    replied
    Originally posted by Deutsche Gopher Fan View Post

    So which of the justices is a Lannister who is ****ing their own sibling?
    Justice Beernuts. His vision gets blurred sometimes and he thinks he’s with his kids.

    Leave a comment:


  • ScoobyDoo
    replied
    Originally posted by Handyman View Post

    No it hasn't because the evidence predates his being elected. Presidential Immunity only covers the President not a candidate.

    And the prosecutors didnt cave...the SC made sentencing on the 11th all but impossible. Merchan would have likely pushed it back to avoid issues brought by the new rules so the DA decided not to make an issue of it and delay sentencing until they know if the trial was even on point anymore.

    The Supreme Court broke the rule of law.
    I don't disagree with anything you said.

    The conviction will be overturned.

    Leave a comment:


  • Handyman
    replied
    Originally posted by ScoobyDoo View Post

    At best they'll have to retry him, and that's a crapshoot at that point. Much of the evidence that was used at trial has been deemed unusable by the Supreme's and their ruling.
    No it hasn't because the evidence predates his being elected. Presidential Immunity only covers the President not a candidate.

    And the prosecutors didnt cave...the SC made sentencing on the 11th all but impossible. Merchan would have likely pushed it back to avoid issues brought by the new rules so the DA decided not to make an issue of it and delay sentencing until they know if the trial was even on point anymore.

    The Supreme Court broke the rule of law.

    Last edited by Handyman; 07-02-2024, 07:42 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Handyman
    replied
    Originally posted by French Rage View Post

    What official act does him making dumb tweets qualify as?
    No friggin idea but they were about Cohen and I think Stormy and most of the legal experts seemed to think he would have a claim. At best though it would be a retrial but that will be next year if ever.

    Leave a comment:


  • ScoobyDoo
    replied
    Originally posted by rufus View Post
    What? What evidence? Nothing they presented were official stuff from the office of the President. Text messages to the Enquirer and his personal lawyer aren't Presidential acts.
    The Prosecutor's already caved and has delayed the sentencing. It's only a matter of time. The guy gets away with everything.

    Leave a comment:


  • rufus
    replied
    Originally posted by ScoobyDoo View Post

    At best they'll have to retry him, and that's a crapshoot at that point. Much of the evidence that was used at trial has been deemed unusable by the Supreme's and their ruling.
    What? What evidence? Nothing they presented were official stuff from the office of the President. Text messages to the Enquirer and his personal lawyer aren't Presidential acts.

    Leave a comment:


  • French Rage
    replied
    Originally posted by Handyman View Post

    The only thing he is supposedly immune from (and they are arguing) was some tweets he made as President. They waved most of the other arguments pre-trial. And again he wasn't President when the scheme started.
    What official act does him making dumb tweets qualify as?

    Leave a comment:


  • ScoobyDoo
    replied
    Originally posted by rufus View Post

    How is falsifying your personal business' financial records an official act of the office of the President?

    Maybe we should ask Hovey?
    At best they'll have to retry him, and that's a crapshoot at that point. Much of the evidence that was used at trial has been deemed unusable by the Supreme's and their ruling.

    Leave a comment:


  • rufus
    replied
    Originally posted by ScoobyDoo View Post
    His conviction in New York will be overturned. He walks. I thought at least the conviction would stand, but legitimate trials by juries mean nothing when it comes to the Republicans Orange God.
    How is falsifying your personal business' financial records an official act of the office of the President?

    Maybe we should ask Hovey?

    Leave a comment:


  • ScoobyDoo
    replied
    His conviction in New York will be overturned. He walks. I thought at least the conviction would stand, but legitimate trials by juries mean nothing when it comes to the Republicans Orange God.

    Leave a comment:


  • rufus
    replied
    Originally posted by Handyman View Post

    Then you prosecute him for it DUH! Oh wait...

    And the answer to your question is...never. No President has ever felt handcuffed. Lincoln suspended Habeas Corpus during the Civil War, Truman nuked two cities in Japan, Kennedy was doing all sorts of shady crap in Cuba, Johnson lied about almost everything in the Vietnam War and had the FBI spy on people all over the country including people in his own party and MLK, Nixon committed all sorts of crimes, Reagan lied to the American people on live TV/Iran Contra, Dubya launched a war that killed a million Iraqis...need I continue?

    Justice Roberts pretending that Presidents need to be immune because we need "decisive actions" is one of the biggest pieces of crap in a decision since Plessy v. Ferguson. The fact that it is almost lifted from Project 2025 tells you all you need to know. That Hovey pretends it is legitimate means he either has no idea what he is talking about or he is a sheep. His stupid "would you want a President arrested in Texas for the border" canard tells me he has no idea how the country works, how the criminal justice system (used to) work or the State and Federal System works. Reading that was pathetic and sad...
    Or, just like the Supremes, he decides the result he wants and then works his way back twisting the law and precedent to arrive at that decision.

    He knows perfectly well how things work. He just prefers that they work the way he wants instead. So he's ok with anything that makes that happen.

    Leave a comment:


  • rufus
    replied
    Originally posted by mookie1995 View Post

    Now is it official duty to take classified documents with you to read on the ****ter on your way out the door?
    what is official and was is not?
    Yes, because the Presidential Records Act says Donnie gets to decide what are government documents and what are his private papers.

    At least that's what he claims. And the Supremes will say, hell yeah.

    Leave a comment:


  • Handyman
    replied
    Originally posted by Slap Shot View Post
    How many times was Hillary right?



    Hovey - what if he actually followed through with this now...?



    The question I have for all the MAGAs defending this decision is this: What were all the instances in the past of POTUS being handcuffed to act on behalf of the American public for fear of prosecution that is now solved?

    Never mind this was never brought to SCOTUS because of that, it was brought only for the personal gain of a POTUS facing prosecution outside the bounds of running the country. I just cannot fathom how the **** SCOTUS has gone this far.
    Then you prosecute him for it DUH! Oh wait...

    And the answer to your question is...never. No President has ever felt handcuffed. Lincoln suspended Habeas Corpus during the Civil War, Truman nuked two cities in Japan, Kennedy was doing all sorts of shady crap in Cuba, Johnson lied about almost everything in the Vietnam War and had the FBI spy on people all over the country including people in his own party and MLK, Nixon committed all sorts of crimes, Reagan lied to the American people on live TV/Iran Contra, Dubya launched a war that killed a million Iraqis...need I continue?

    Justice Roberts pretending that Presidents need to be immune because we need "decisive actions" is one of the biggest pieces of crap in a decision since Plessy v. Ferguson. The fact that it is almost lifted from Project 2025 tells you all you need to know. That Hovey pretends it is legitimate means he either has no idea what he is talking about or he is a sheep. His stupid "would you want a President arrested in Texas for the border" canard tells me he has no idea how the country works, how the criminal justice system (used to) work or the State and Federal System works. Reading that was pathetic and sad...

    Leave a comment:


  • Handyman
    replied
    Originally posted by First Time, Long Time View Post
    The only thing he is supposedly immune from (and they are arguing) was some tweets he made as President. They waved most of the other arguments pre-trial. And again he wasn't President when the scheme started.

    The DAs are smart to wait even though it is ridiculously annoying. Trump's team has the right to appeal and denying that could make the issue way worse. The new BS standard that Hovey loves so much has muddied the waters so badly no decision can be made on anything any time soon. The Supreme Court legit just completely screwed the criminal justice system.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X