home bbs files messages ]

Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"

   sci.military.naval      Navies of the world, past, present and f      118,661 messages   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]

   Message 118,400 of 118,661   
   Trumptronic to All   
   Justices claim immunity ruling allows pr   
   02 Jul 24 10:12:40   
   
   XPost: alt.politics.trump, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, talk.politics.guns   
   XPost: sac.politics   
   From: trumptronic@gmail.com   
      
   If this case was about that gay nigger Obama, Democrats would be dancing in   
   the streets and lighting bonfires.   
      
   Remember when Obama had Seal Team 6 killed for telling the truth about him?   
      
   In their dissents from the Supreme Court's decision on presidential   
   immunity, the court's liberal justices suggested that the majority opinion   
   allows for a slew of alarming scenarios — including a president ordering a   
   Navy SEAL team to "assassinate" his political rival or even poisoning one of   
   his own cabinet members.   
      
   The high court on Monday ruled 6-3 that a president has substantial immunity   
   for official acts that occurred during his time in office. It's a decision   
   that has significant implications for former President Trump, whose   
   prosecution on charges related to the Jan. 6 U.S. Capitol breach and alleged   
   2020 election interference spurred the Supreme Court to hear the case.   
      
   But although the majority opinion from Chief Justice John Roberts explicitly   
   stated that the president "is not above the law" and immunity is only a   
   factor when it involves an "official act" — the justices sent the case back   
   to lower courts to determine if the acts at the center of Trump's case were   
   "official" — the ruling raised a series of frightening possibilities,   
   according to the trio of dissenting justices.   
      
   Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Ketanji Brown Jackson and Elena Kagan wrote in the   
   primary dissent that the court's majority opinion "makes a mockery of the   
   principle, foundational to our Constitution and system of Government, that   
   no man is above the law."   
      
      
   "The President of the United States is the most powerful person in the   
   country, and possibly the world. When he uses his official powers in any   
   way, under the majority’s reasoning, he now will be insulated from criminal   
   prosecution," Sotomayor wrote. "Orders the Navy’s Seal Team 6 to assassinate   
   a political rival? Immune. Organizes a military coup to hold onto power?   
   Immune. Takes a bribe in exchange for a pardon? Immune. Immune, immune,   
   immune."   
      
      
   Sotomayor added that the majority decision has "shifted irrevocably" the   
   relationship between the president and the American people, being that "in   
   every use of official power, the President is now a king above the law."   
      
      
   Yet another startling scenario is included in a footnote from a separate   
   dissent authored by Jackson.   
      
   Noting that the president's removal of a cabinet member would constitute an   
   official act, Jackson says that "while the President may have the authority   
   to decide to remove the Attorney General, for example, the question here is   
   whether the President has the option to remove the Attorney General by, say,   
   poisoning him to death."   
      
      
      
   Both dissents were taken to task in the court's majority opinion.   
      
   "As for the dissents, they strike a tone of chilling doom that is wholly   
   disproportionate to what the Court actually does today…," Roberts wrote.   
      
      
   TRUMP TOUTS SUPREME COURT'S PRESIDENTIAL IMMUNITY RULING AS 'BIG WIN FOR OUR   
   CONSTITUTION AND FOR DEMOCRACY'   
      
   Adding that the dissents came "up short on reasoning," Roberts wrote that   
   the "positions in the end boil down to ignoring the Constitution’s   
   separation of powers and the Court’s precedent and instead fear mongering on   
   the basis of extreme hypotheticals about a future where the President ‘feels   
   empowered to violate federal criminal law.'"   
      
   Sotomayor's dissent swiftly reverberated throughout social media. Former   
   Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who lost to Trump in the 2016 election,   
   posted on X that she agrees with Sotomayor's stand against the "MAGA wing"   
   of the high court.   
      
   "It will be up to the American people this November to hold Donald Trump   
   accountable," Clinton wrote.   
      
   Your day of accountability is coming, Hillary.   
      
   https://www.foxnews.com/politics/justices-claim-immunity-ruling-allows-   
   presidents-poison-staffers-have-navy-seals-kill-political-rivals   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca