Politics Thread

[bjf123]

There is no presidential immunity clause in the constitution. I don’t care about trump and his trials, but apparently the SCOTUS sure does.

The Dems brought this on themselves by going after Trump both civilly and criminally in so many areas. The issue had to be resolved. Every President needs absolute immunity for official acts. The issues becomes what is an official act. Without the immunity, would that mean Obama could be tried for murder related to the 4 US citizens killed in the drone strike he ordered? That was clearly done within this authority as Commander in Chief and he correctly has absolute immunity, even though there was collateral damage.

Would that mean a President could take a page from Putin’s playbook and have his chief political rival killed? I think we would all agree that falls outside the realm of an official act and there’d be no immunity.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GoMuskies]

Would that mean a President could take a page from Putin’s playbook and have his chief political rival killed? I think we would all agree that falls outside the realm of an official act and there’d be no immunity.

Would we? Because a lot of people on Twitter today seem to think Biden could have Trump (or the Supreme Court justices) killed and be free and clear.

Those people are idiots, of course, but there are a lot of idiots out there in the wild.

[XU_Lou]

Definitely crooked Joe....but all of the "syndicate" members will be not so lucky.

The "syndicate", as you put it, has existed since at least the JFK assassination. When you realize how much we've been grossly lied to about JFK, Yellow Cake, WMD in Iraq, the 2008 housing crisis, Russia Collusion, Covid, 51 intelligence members saying Hunter's computer was fake, the two-tiered justice system, Biden is as "sharp as a tack", etc., etc,., you begin the look at most of America's post-WWII history with a more cynical eye.

In my view, Trump is the only person that has even a sliver of a chance of breaking the deep state. It's precisely why they've taken every measure to destroy him. A JFK-style assassination is probably too obvious now. Instead, they've opted for character assassination. Our citizenry is obviously too stupid to recognize what's going on.

[Xville]

The Dems brought this on themselves by going after Trump both civilly and criminally in so many areas. The issue had to be resolved. Every President needs absolute immunity for official acts. The issues becomes what is an official act. Without the immunity, would that mean Obama could be tried for murder related to the 4 US citizens killed in the drone strike he ordered? That was clearly done within this authority as Commander in Chief and he correctly has absolute immunity, even though there was collateral damage.

Would that mean a President could take a page from Putin’s playbook and have his chief political rival killed? I think we would all agree that falls outside the realm of an official act and there’d be no immunity.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is all fair and I appreciate your insights. The issue I have with the actual decision, like you said, is what is "an official act." That's a pretty slippery slope to go down, even though I understand that we as a nation have checks and balances in place.

The issue I have outside of the decision is the "this is a win for the constitution" talk. There is nothing in the Constitution that discusses Presidential Immunity. There are Executive Branch guardrails that can be interpreted what one way or the other depending on the SCOTUS.

[bobbiemcgee]

Apparently Biden can send Seal Team 6 over to the SCOTUS and Maralago today without repercussions.

[GoMuskies]

Would we? Because a lot of people on Twitter today seem to think Biden could have Trump (or the Supreme Court justices) killed and be free and clear.

Those people are idiots, of course, but there are a lot of idiots out there in the wild.

Apparently Biden can send Seal Team 6 over to the SCOTUS and Maralago today without repercussions.

Go on...

[xuwillie]

Go on...

Ha so true.

[bobbiemcgee]

It's a ridiculous decision.

[paulxu]

Would that mean a President could take a page from Putin’s playbook and have his chief political rival killed? I think we would all agree that falls outside the realm of an official act and there’d be no immunity.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Would we? He could say that he believed the rival was a menace to the country and as commander-in-chief, he was acting in an "official" capacity to protect the country. This decision would allow for that. Read the whole thing.

[GoMuskies]

I feel like some of you guys get your legal analysis from Elie Mystal.