Politics is Stupid

Donald Trump’s words and actions leading up to the January 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol have hinged on whether they were an official act as President or if they were done by a political candidate. Those didn’t automatically overlap.

The Supreme Court just ruled that “We conclude that under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of presidential power requires that a former president have some immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts during his tenure in office. At least with respect to the President’s exercise of his core constitutional powers, this immunity must be absolute.” Followed by ““The President enjoys no immunity for his unofficial acts, and not everything the President does is official. The President is not above the law.”

It took me five seconds to figure out how to turn this limited immunity into complete immunity: redefine what constitutes an official Presidential act as “anything the President says or does that occurs the moment they are sworn in to the moment they leave office”.

If Trump gets back in as President, how long do you think it would take him to get that new definition implemented?

If Trump is president in 2025 he wont have time to do anything of the sort because things like the Steele Dossier and other assorted BS will take 90% of everyone’s time. It will be constant external attacks and soft rebellion in DC. Plenty of departments were ignoring the appointed head and just doing business as normal the first time he was President, the second time I doubt if they will pay any more attention to a lame duck.

Hell, some of it might even be real this time, but from Biden’s illegal use of wire tapping instead of Obama’s.

The Republican project 2025 document of what they plan on enacting sounds like America is about to be Hitler’s America. The basic rights they plan on stripping from women, PoC, and lgbt+ is just the start. We are not in a good place as a country, and i expect down fall soon.

Im concerned enough that I am considering packing Bug out bags and looking to move out of the states. I live in California, im sure it will be one of the states that fight the behavior of the far right, but i don’t trust it.

First of all The Heritage Foundation is not the Republican party. Secondly, comparing everything to literally Hitler ks part of why politics are they way they are now. McCain was literally Hitler, Bush was literally Hitler, Romney was literally Hitler, and now Trum is totally literally Hitler. Zombie Hitler could run now and most people would blow it off, because everyone people don’t like is literally Hitler.

If anyone in power was worried about Trump actually being Hitlerish, they would be rolling back all the power they have given the Executive Branch. Don’t want the president having thw power to x, y, or z? Remove the Department of X, Y and z’s ability to rule theough executive declaration. Issue is, both sides enjoy that power too mich to give it up. And they won’t until they have to.

Juat like I don’t believe the people who own beachfront property valued in the tens of millions when they say the oceans are rising, I dont believe people who yell about abuse of power who keep the levers of power loose and easy to get to.

If the latest ruling from the supreme court was in place during Nixon’s reign, he would never have resigned as he would have had immunity for his actions.
If a president decides to create a death squad, then that’s fine because they have immunity from prosecution (as per Sotomayor’s dissent). And don’t give me any crap about no president would do that, because Trump would if it benefitted him.

This ruling from the supreme court is absolutely disastrous. It completely upends the constitution and sets up the president as King, with the supreme court being the hand of the king (GoT). And this from the so-called “originalists”. Where on earth did the constitution say that the president should be immune from prosecution?

Best comment I have seen on this subject.

With this Supreme Court ruling POTUS could:

  1. Start a war with American citizens killing 600,000+
  2. Put an entire race in internment camps
  3. Drop Nukes on civilians
  4. invade a sovereign country
  5. drone strike American citizens

And face ZERO consequences.
Think about it.

#2 has been done, though internment camp means that they’re actually criminals. I think you meant concentration camp. I learned the difference between those two words at the Tule Lake Segregation Center.

1 Like

They have all been done. Lincoln, FDR, Truman, Obama. And all of them might have thought it was for the best and the greater good, but none of them had the actual constitutional authority to do so.

I just copied this, but the only people I know who were in one called them internment camps, though concentration camp is likely more correct. And I would have sidestepped the whole issue and called then just camps if I wrote it.

1 Like

You’re right. They’ve all been done. For some reason I was just thinking within US borders.

Congratulations, with that completely specious argument you’ve actually just strengthened the case of people arguing against the supreme court.

All those things happened, without the court’s decision.

What’s not said in that nonsense is all the additional things that the president can now do without fear of prosecution. And that’s the scary part because it is highly likely that Trump will do illegal stuff* if he ever becomes president again.

* Actually that term is inaccurate because it’s no longer illegal if the president does it (as per Nixon)

1 Like

Oh, Rudy, Rudy, Rudy. You’re bankrupt, you have a $148 million judgment against you for defamation, you’ve been indicted for your role trying to overturn the Arizona 2020 election, the loss of your law license will likely be applied nationally, and as of today and effective immediately, you’ve been disbarred by the New York state Supreme Court.

Was it worth it? Was what you’ve sacrificed and given to support Donald Trump worth it?

So what could he do that would possibly be worse than any of those things? The Supreme Court’s ruling is simply enforcing the law as it’s been handled for over 200 years. Again.

Death Squads, dude, look around. Over 17 Federal agencies have fully equipped SWAT and threat response teams, easily loanable to other agencies like the Department of Education for their jackboot door kicking duties. And the FBI “accidentally” kills people off and on with their regular response teams. How many people died in Waco or Ruby Ridge without anyone serving real time? Obama killed people in Yemen, Pakistan, and Somalia, all three countries we aren’t even vaguely at war with, and killed at least three American citizens. Without a mandate beyond the “War on Terror.”

If it’s done as part of his official duties, sure. Just like it already was. The ruling itself references the constitution as the limiting factor. Which it always has been. Ordering your political opponent charged with spurious charges to keep them from running would not be an immune official act. There is nothing that gives that power in the constitution. Trump talking to the Justice Department about the election and fraud, is an official act. Trump working with people to have alternate, or fake, electors, may or may not be an official act. But if it’s actionable, then we need another half dozen cases on that ASAP. Way too many politicians have done similar things in the last 30 years to start worrying about it now.

Again, this is nothing new. It’s how it’s always been, and as I quoted, it’s often been worse, unless politics gets involved. The day after Trump does half of what some people are scared of he’ll be assassinated and we’ll have President whoever the hell.

I watched one of the discussions of the immunity decision. It said that the Supreme Court seemed to be approaching it as trying to keep the Department of Justice from going after Presidents, rather than whether a President would misuse having the immunity.

At the end, the comment was made that just because a President now will be protected if they do something, should they do it? That was the wrong question. The right question is will they do it?

Biden? He was the authority to right now get Trump out of the way. It wouldn’t have to be using SEAL Team Six, as the example is often given after it came up with Trump earlier this year. But he could make an official Presidential declaration that Trump is a threat to the national security of the country and have him placed in solitary confinement in a supermax prison. Will he do that?

Trump? For that, you have to look at his life.

  • Born into a wealthy family and hasn’t known any hardship like being poor or starvation.
  • Ran his businesses very much like mob-run businesses
  • Had not been forced to deal with any consequences because he used money to make problems go away
  • Does not allow anyone to tell him no
  • Requires people to praise him, such as telling state Governors when they came to him asking for disaster relief funds, “Ask me nicely.”
  • Rants if people don’t praise him enough.
  • Starts off by telling the world how good the person he hired is and then tears them apart when they do something he doesn’t like.
  • Throws temper tantrums.
  • Gravitates towards authoritarian and other dictatorial leaders.
  • The demonizing and dehumanizing of political rivals and groups he does not like, such as migrants.
  • Has a narcissistic personality that is reinforced by the lack of people that say no and the abundance of yes men.
  • Views himself as a savior. “Only I can save you.”; “I will be your retribution.”
  • Says whatever makes him look good at that particular moment, even if it contradicts what he said before.
  • Used being President as a way of avoiding debts and consequences that were about to come to pass.
  • Has been facing the possibility of going to prison and views being President as the key to making them go away.
  • Is showing more and more physical and verbal signs pointing towards dementia.

If you have a person like that, how likely is it they would misuse the immunity the Supreme Court bestowed on them? If they know that all they have to do is make sure an action is an official act of the office of the President and they are protected from any and all consequences, how likely would a person like that take advantage of that immunity?
 

Woodman brought up if Trump was Hitlerish, why weren’t countermeasures taken? The answer is people tried. There were people that thought they could be the voice of reason, to help steer him away from some really bad ideas.

Sometimes they succeeded if they could divert his attention to something else so he would forget about it, at least for a while. Others dumbed down briefings so there was a better chance Trump would pay attention and would be able to understand what was going on.

But many of them learned he couldn’t be controlled or prevented from doing what he wanted. When he would be briefed on the pandemic as it was going on, he listened to the people that told him things he wanted to hear and made him look good, rather than the people who were telling him reality and what he needed to do to protect the public.

There were many more yes men supporting him, praising him and telling him how great he is. It went beyond the typical viewpoint of “He’s our guy, we’re going to support him” to “We’re going to support him no matter what he does, no matter what he says and protect him no matter what”, along with excusing, condoning and encouraging the things he says and does. There have been several attempts to change laws just to protect him.

And that reinforces what happened throughout his life, where there were no consequences for what he did. The people excusing, condoning and encouraging him are the reason why we now have the phrase “alternative facts”, which used to be called fabrications or lies.
 

Back in 2015 and 2016, I would see the things that appeared to be blown out of proportion. The claims that Trump was The Next Hitler™. Back then, I thought it was the typical “he’s not our guy, so it’s our duty to say bad things about him”. I was willing to give him a chance to show people were wrong about him and said so in these forums.

Over the years, I learned to pay more attention. It’s been through Trump’s own words and actions that it hasn’t all been exaggerations and “say bad things because he’s not our guy”. There’s been more and more indications that they were warnings, warnings that people chose to deliberately disregard.

We’re just a few months away from learning if those warnings were correct. I think there’s a very strong possibility they are. Trump didn’t accept the results of the last election. He’s made enough statements to make it clear he won’t for this one. When you add what he’s said and done in the past to the guarantee of immunity if he becomes President again and how many people willingly excuse, condone and encourage him, the parallels with Germany of the 1920s and 1930s grow stronger.

Trump has several stories he likes to tell. One type of story is the unnamed people that come up to him and tell him how grateful they are for what he does and to show their admiration for him. Often, they are “big, strong men with tears in their eyes”.

Another story is called “The Woman and the Snake”, about a woman that rescues a beautiful snake shivering in the cold. After all the woman does for the snake, it still bites her. As she dies, she tells it, she doesn’t understand why. The snake replies, “You stupid woman. You knew I was a snake when you took me in.”

Trump has been warning us for years about his nature. Too many people have chosen not to care, not to heed the warnings, and instead excuse, condone and encourage what he does.

2 Likes

It sounds like you don’t feel that a president should not be required to have at least a normal moral compass. So, if atrocities are okay, why not larceny, fraud, SA, since those are lesser crimes?

If a president has no opportunity to commit atrocities during their term, they have plenty of opportunities for lesser crimes. That makes it okay for the president to commit those crimes?

1 Like

I have seen several examples bandied around. One has been mentioned by @RRabbit42: Order the military to arrest your political rivals and lock them up. The military is presidential business so no prosecution for that - and they do it in Russia so why not America?

As @Nabiki pointed out, it doesn’t have to be atrocities. Want a pardon? That’ll be $1M please. Pardons are official presidential business, so no prosecution for selling one.

I’m sure that the sycophants Trump would surround himself with would come up with far more formerly illegal stuff then you or I could.

Edit: Legal Eagle’s take on this

As opposed to selling time with the President? Several people just paid almost a million to meet with the President for a couple hours. A not uncommon event for either party, at any level of government. Or how about a multi million dollar advance for a book or three that will sell thousands of copies?

But again, if it’s an official act, the president has always been allowed to do it without being charged with crimes. Literally the overarching document of the country says what he is allowed to do, and if it says he can do that, then he can. And yes, Biden could declare Trump a clear and present danger to the country and not be arrested and tried for murder, if a court verifies that it was an official act. His political career would be over, but it wouldn’t be a crime, just a paperwork hassle. And that’s always been true. We rely on our presidents to either be decent people, or value their reputation enough to avoid ambiguous actions.

The real curb to this problem is to run the government as intended and stop handing power away from Congress to the other two branches.

And this is yet another issue where it is impossible to find a real analysis of, people who are for X are against this and people who are for Y are for it.

Are you serious? Did you actually read what you were saying before posting?
Normally when I disagree with you I can at least recognise the rationality of what you are saying - but here? That’s just … wow.

1 Like

Has anyone seen the now-released Epstine documents were Rump is mentioned 68+ times, and is confirmed to have raped multiple children?
This alone should bar him from ever holding any kind of position of power ever again.

1 Like

I did read something yesterday to the effect that this might be what finally moves the needle to get some people not to vote for him.

Joe Biden has been doing a full court press, making speeches, going on radio interviews, etc - in an obvious effort to negate the effects of his awful debate performance and show that he is in robust health.
But it has been revealed that for some of the radio interviews Biden’s camp have been providing the list of questions that the interviewer is allowed to ask. I don’t know who thought that would be a good idea, but it has had the opposite effect than the intended one.
Dumb move :roll_eyes: