Politics Thread

[Leghorn]

I think Trump still beats Hillary, Mayor Pete and Warren. Maybe Newsom. The rest I agree.

[GoMuskies]

Those are your words, not mine.

I think women, because she is likeable (especially vs Trump who wants to fuck his daughter and grab'em by the pussy) unlike what Hilary was back in '16.

I think African American 1.) because historically they have voted democrat, and 2.) if you've not noticed she's a minority.

Kamala isn't likeable.

[paulxu]

Happy Birthday America! Hope you are relaxing and celebrating somewhere with friends and family.

Hot here in the South today!.

Something to reflect on as our nation celebrates its 224th birthday. As Judge Luttig noted:

It can never again be said that in America “no man is above the law.” The Supreme Court held today that the President of the United States — and the former president in particular — is above the law, and the only person in America who is above the law.

(which makes me think the words above the Supreme Court entrance “Equal Justice Under Law” no longer apply in our country.)

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/mornin...ican-democracy

[Xville]

It’s funny watching dems on Twitter whine about the medias coverage post debate.

[bjf123]

If this has been asked and answered, sorry for the repetition, but I can’t keep track of every post in here.

For those of you saying that the SCOTUS ruling means the President is above the law and untouchable, except for being impeached, do you think the ruling should have been that the President, whoever that might be, has no immunity at all? If that was the ruling, I can envision a future where Presidents are spending a lot time defending themselves from politically motivated criminal and civil charges. The charges might not even be politically motivated. Extrapolating from the example I gave a few days ago, do we want a President to be able to be charged for murder by the family of innocent individuals killed in a drone strike while going after a legitimate military target?

There has to be some immunity. The issue is where to draw the line. The sad thing is that this even had to be brought before the SCOTUS.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[UCGRAD4X]

The fact that the article self-describes as a "special hair-on-fire edition of TPM’s Morning Memo" tells you all you need to know. That and the the sky-is-falling hyperbole of the first few sentences makes this a very niche read.

[XU_Lou]

If this has been asked and answered, sorry for the repetition, but I can’t keep track of every post in here.

For those of you saying that the SCOTUS ruling means the President is above the law and untouchable, except for being impeached, do you think the ruling should have been that the President, whoever that might be, has no immunity at all? If that was the ruling, I can envision a future where Presidents are spending a lot time defending themselves from politically motivated criminal and civil charges. The charges might not even be politically motivated. Extrapolating from the example I gave a few days ago, do we want a President to be able to be charged for murder by the family of innocent individuals killed in a drone strike while going after a legitimate military target?

There has to be some immunity. The issue is where to draw the line. The sad thing is that this even had to be brought before the SCOTUS.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes, this question has been asked several times, but Paul refuses to answer it. He and his fellow travelers can't think beyond their next meal.

[GoMuskies]

I'm sure Paul thinks Obama should be prosecuted for droning an American citizen.

[GoMuskies]

It’s funny watching dems on Twitter whine about the medias coverage post debate.

The conspiracy theories I'm seeing from the left are down right Q-ish. CNN intentionally messed with his lighting
CNN intentionally messed with his audio. The camera angle was more favorable to Trump. Trump somehow poisoned him.

Anything but the obvious that anyone with eyes and a brain has known for quite a while.

[paulxu]

I’m not defending Biden’s horrible debate performance.
I’m worried about the future of our country. That concern is shared by very knowledgeable people, including many advisors/cabinet members of the former president.
To the question noted earlier…somehow every president before him was OK with operating within the law. It’s only this former president who has a need for some sort of immunity. That should be the enough of a red flag for anyone looking at the upending of centuries of “no one is above the law”…our foundational principle to grasp.
Has anyone here read the decision? I urge you to do so. I think it will be like Dred Scott…and decades down the road be reversed. Hopefully the country is smart enough not to elect someone who wants to be dictator/king. That’s why we have a country in the first place; we didn’t want one.