Most of the analysis of the Justices’ arguments on Thursday that I’ve read suggests that complete immunity is highly unlikely. To his point about the trial getting delayed and Trump getting elected, that’s a real possibility.
He can still become president with a criminal conviction. He just can’t vote in the election. Isn’t our system swell?
The rationale for this actually makes some sense. You wouldn’t want an incumbent to be able to remove an opponent by railroading them into a minor felony conviction. With the way Trump ran things, if all it took was a minor felony to make sure Biden was ineligible, he absolutely would have pressured the DOJ to find something.
This is what Putin conveniently does for any opposition.
And America does to voters instead.
How does that make sense if you’re not allowed to participate in the voting process as a felon? Or do you also think that felons should be eligible to vote?
I can’t think of any good reason anyone’s right to vote should be revoked. In fact, it’s probably very important that those that have been targeted by the system are able to have their voice.
I agree. It simply makes no sense that felons don’t get a say in the nation, but can somehow run it.
felons should be elligible to vote. For one, there are statistically a number of people in jail who are fully innocent but convicted anyway. Second it means that politicians would have incentives not to ignore conditions of inmates. If you look at groups unable to vote: noncitizen legal residents, kids, and prisoners then you see people with fewer rightds.
If you have served your time, then all rights should be restored to you. So many people are stuck in a system of poverty because of how our system works.
That’s primarily due to application disclosure law not having an expiration or qualification for forgiveness. Make one bad choice at 18 and you’ll be working entry-level or manual labor for the rest of your life. Not to mention the difficulty in finding a landlord that’ll rent to you. It’s so close-minded that we don’t believe in rehabilitation or change as a nation.
It really shouldn’t be legal to ask if someone was a non-violent felon (violent felons would need a different classification).
As of now, it’s mandatory to disclose if you’ve ever had a conviction, and verified prior to employment.
There are some things it’s relevant for, in terms of financial crimes or pharmaceuticals.
Or a rape charges for working in a SA survivor clinic.
Elder abuse in nursing homes…
Etc.
And all of a sudden when see why we just need to stop categorizing things into felony/misdemeanor and take cases individually
Yeah, however in this case Trump did all the felonies is on his own. Your argument is for a very specific set of circumstances, in which one party nominates a candidate for the primaries, who, then commits felony crimes before the general election.
I’m actually okay with that.
There are too many people with false convictions
You’re ok with a man who has openly conspired with Russia to overthrow the US government being president?
Please tell me that’s not what you meant.
I think they were meaning they’re fine with felons voting, which I can’t disagree with.
It’s similar to how many guilty men would you let go free before you were ok with jailing an innocent man.
When the choice is between a conspired atrocity vs an active support of a genocide… ima go with the one that just says yeah we’re guna kill them all.
What system is better bro? I mean, what country the size of the United States is doing it the “right way?” India? China?
That is a false equivalence
It’s much more of a question that requires perspective and thought to address beyond just drive by hand waving one liners.
Idk, not taking away voting rights of citizens after they did their time?
Come on, it’s not that hard to think about what could be made better.
They won’t come down on the side of presidential immunity because it would basically be saying “Biden senpai please assassinate me uwu”
Just close your eyes and imagine Clarence Thomas saying this. He’s winking and throwing up a peace sign with one foot kicked up in the air. It makes no sense and he will never do this.
They’ll decide against immunity, but after the election. If Biden wins, they won’t want him immune. If Trump wins, he won’t need immunity anymore.
They’ll issue the opinion in mid-late June, maybe early July, when most SCOTUS decisions come out. The issue is that they will probably remand it to the lower courts for other decisions.
There has to be a middle ground…if charging Presidents for things they did while in office is going to be allowed, this will in no doubt open a can of worms. I can see Republicans going after Obama for things…
I mean if he broke the law and there is enough evidence to get a conviction amongst a jury of his peers then, like, yeah, go for it. I don’t want any president or any citizen to be able to claim immunity just because they held political office for some period of time. Like if you can’t lead the country legally then don’t lead it? Don’t do the crime if you can’t do the time or some platitude.
It’s not just “what he did in office”.
HE TRIED TO OVERTHROW THE MOTHER FUCKING GOVERNMENT TO CLING TO POWER. GET THAT THROUGH YOUR GOD DAMNED HEAD.
I’m sorry, but I am so tired of this argument. He commit fucking treason. That is literally what happened. We are all pretending like it is some nebulous thing, and it isn’t. He is the textbook definition of a fucking traitor.
Yup, and there are a hundred accomplices still in office.
The Supreme Court will define “treason” by what the constitution says, and Trump does not fall into this category:
“Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.”
So, unless you:
a.) Recruit and assemble a militia and use it to actively engage in insurrection or
b.) provide aid to a foreign power with whom we are actively in a declared war
He did not recruit all those Trumpsters, they did that stupid shit on their own. He didn’t help the cause, but he did not actively recruit them to attack the government.
My point is that the LEFT is throwing that word around way too much…without really knowing how it’s defined.
“Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.”
a.) Recruit and assemble a militia and use it to actively engage in insurrection
Definitionally it was a militia:
Recruiting said militia:
Proof of motive for committing treason:
Nobody should take you seriously because you are as pathetically weak willed and spineless as you are dishonest. Defending what Donald Trump did and the Supreme Court’s usurpation of the Constitution to allow him to avoid prosecution makes you a traitor to democracy. You disgust me.
Okay. I guess we’ll wait and see what happens. Cheers! Oh, and VOTE RED!
I would stick a shotgun in my mouth and pull the trigger with my toes before I would vote for Donald Trump.
deleted by creator
I don’t necessarily “support” Trump, it’s about what he will actually be found guilt of. Left wing driven sites like Lemmy and Reddit do nothing but attack the Right and anyone who supports Republicans…I just like to remind you all that the Right is NOT just about Trump. In the meantime, let’s wait and see what he’s actually found guilty of… I vote primarily Republican (although I’m registered Independent), but I’m leaning more towards RFK Jr. if anyone…
Ok Alito
I can see Republicans going after Obama for things…
Please list these “things” and the laws they are in violation of.
One of the justices should have asked “If we decide in favor of immunity, couldn’t Biden claim in order to protect the rule of law he could kill us and replace us with justices who would actually uphold the law and the Constitution?”
They did by asking about political rivals.
You have to consider what people actually will do.
They can make this decision knowing that the Dems won’t commit the domestic-genocide they’re committed to enabling,
knowing that it is the nonwhites & left who’re going to be getting the genociding.
Political-motivation works that kind of way.
That is why I want a “political-motivation-ectomy” for civilization.
Political-motivation is cancerous.
Issue-diagrams are objective, & capable of cracking even urban-planning problems.
but who is going to force objectivity/practicality against ideology’s-highjacking?
The dems won’t, the left won’t, the libertarians can’t even understand civil-infrastructure, the “conservatives” ( privilege-conservatives aren’t the only category of people who “conserve”, as conservationists conserve, but are called non-conservatives… damned newspeak bullshit )
Those judges know what they’re doing.
If they don’t, they’re literally signing their own death warrants next time a republican takes office.
History has repeatedly and firmly demonstrated that rich liberals never believe it will happen to them as it happens to them.
The megarich ones are right though. But they’re also not actually invested in things like “democracy” and “human rights.”
Legislating from the bench is only okay when conservatives (read: fascists) do it.
I don’t know why anyone is surprised by this. It’s been the plan since the insurrection failed. They need to nail down R support with an iron fist single they’ll never get the popular vote again.
Pretty radical, would dig it to see his fat ass do a kick flip. Would almost excuse his fascism, racism, and treason.
deleted by creator
I wonder if he is found guilty, can other Presidents be charged with past crimes? I mean, I get the anger from Lefty Lemmy, but, there has to be a middle ground. A President simply can’t be charged for something just because one side thinks he’s guilty. If that’s the case, I can see Republicans going after Obama for crimes he committed while POTUS…
Name one president who has been charged with a crime more serious than a speeding ticket.
Now,
Name another US president that staged a fucking insurrection because he lost the fucking election.
While we wait for those answers, do you really think your bronzed-idol trump is actually being falsely accused?
Now now, Trump isn’t NECESSARILY being charged with just that.
He also removed confidential documents from the White House without them being properly redacted, potentially sold or gave those documents to other parties (or at least allowed them to see the documents), AND may have conspired to silence stories about him in an illegal manner prior to the 2016 election, AND may have also conspired to submit false documentation regarding the 2020 election results to several states AND may have also attempted to force the Georgia Secretary of State to falsify their results.
Unfortunately, I have little hope of any of these coming to fruition as convictions - Cannon is all but conceding the documents trial to Trump via extensions, delays, and simply attempting to drop the trial entirely, Georgia’s prosecution forgot it was improper to fuck each other during a case, and New York can’t help but keep giving them more time.
A President simply can’t be charged for something just because one side thinks he’s guilty.
He’a being charged because he committed a crime. Republicans could retaliate in kind and charge Obama, but it wouldn’t work because Obama didn’t commit a crime. Simple as.
Hopefully, if someone commits a crime they should be charged, and novel trials may improve justice by setting precedent through transparent jury trial instead of closed doors scotus. If you charge someone without sufficient evidence you should be open to a countersuit. Based on oral arguments it sounds like they are defining where ‘in the line of duty’ ends and ‘actions of some guy who also has a job as president’ begins. Asking for 11,780 votes pretty obviously falls outside of the bounds of the job and it shouldn’t take months to rule on that.
