Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

SCOTUS: sponsored by Harlan Crow

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

  • 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:


  • mookie1995
    replied
    Originally posted by rufus View Post

    Official duty, Commander in Chief, so all good. Those damn BLM cucks should have known better.
    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?

    Leave a comment:


  • First Time, Long Time
    replied
    And there it is...

    https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/don...ing-rcna159965

    Leave a comment:


  • rufus
    replied
    Donald Trump’s former Sec. Def. Mark Esper: “[Trump] was suggesting that...we should bring in the troops and shoot the protesters.”

    Q: “The commander-in-chief was suggesting that the U.S. military shoot protesters?”

    Esper: “Yes, in the streets of our nation’s capital.”
    Official duty, Commander in Chief, so all good. Those damn BLM cucks should have known better.

    Leave a comment:


  • rufus
    replied
    Originally posted by Handyman View Post

    That is why I said Joe should means test it right now Make sure to do it and describe it using the very words the Justices used so when they don't give him Immunity even Stevie Wonder will be able to see why...

    (and hey Trump will be dead!)
    "I swore an oath to protect the country and the Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic"

    Leave a comment:


  • Slap Shot
    replied
    How many times was Hillary right?

    In 2016, Hillary Clinton gave a speech in Wisconsin about the importance of the Supreme Court. She warned that 2016 was "make or break" for the court—and the country. National media—focused on her emails and Trump's antics—barely covered the speech.
    Hovey - what if he actually followed through with this now...?

    Donald Trump’s former Sec. Def. Mark Esper: “[Trump] was suggesting that...we should bring in the troops and shoot the protesters.”

    Q: “The commander-in-chief was suggesting that the U.S. military shoot protesters?”

    Esper: “Yes, in the streets of our nation’s capital.”
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • Handyman
    replied
    Originally posted by Deutsche Gopher Fan View Post

    So which of the justices is a Lannister who is ****ing their own sibling?
    My guess is Kavanaugh. I would have said Thomas but there aint no way he is phucking with a ****er. (no I didn't type it)

    Leave a comment:


  • Handyman
    replied
    Originally posted by First Time, Long Time View Post

    Well Republican presidents have that immunity I doubt a Democrat will...
    That is why I said Joe should means test it right now Make sure to do it and describe it using the very words the Justices used so when they don't give him Immunity even Stevie Wonder will be able to see why...

    (and hey Trump will be dead!)

    Leave a comment:


  • First Time, Long Time
    replied
    Originally posted by rufus View Post
    He had every right to take those documents, Presidential Records Act says he could. And since that is part of his official duties, he can't be prosecuted.

    And the Supremes will say, hell yeah!!!
    Well yeah I mean he declassified them with his mind so of course he's allowed to take them...

    Leave a comment:


  • Swansong
    replied
    Awful tough to prosecute a former president when official acts, even if they're criminal or furthering criminal activity, are immune and can't even be brought up as evidence of said criminal acts.

    Leave a comment:


  • rufus
    replied
    Originally posted by First Time, Long Time View Post

    Like I said...he's going to push and push and see what SCOTUS will side with him on. And I wouldn't trust those six judges any further than I could throw them...
    He had every right to take those documents, Presidential Records Act says he could. And since that is part of his official duties, he can't be prosecuted.

    And the Supremes will say, hell yeah!!!

    Leave a comment:


  • First Time, Long Time
    replied
    Originally posted by Deutsche Gopher Fan View Post

    Shhh you sound hysterical.

    **** him, telling us were hysterical for thinking the court could strip rights and here he is explaining how it’s not a big deal.

    president- immunity to do what he wants
    gov agencies- no authority
    Well Republican presidents have that immunity I doubt a Democrat will...

    Leave a comment:


  • Deutsche Gopher Fan
    replied
    Originally posted by Handyman View Post
    I don't often say this but Joy Ann Reid is right...they made the President the King and the Court his "Hand" ala Game of Thrones.
    So which of the justices is a Lannister who is ****ing their own sibling?

    Leave a comment:


  • aparch
    replied

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X