this post was submitted on 30 Apr 2024
578 points (97.5% liked)

politics

19104 readers
3273 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

"Unlikely Trump will ever be tried for the crimes he committed," says ex-Judge J. Michael Luttig

It’s not a hard question, or at least it hasn’t been before: Does the United States have a king – one empowered to do as they please without even the pretext of being governed by a law higher than their own word – or does it have a president? Since Donald Trump began claiming he enjoys absolute immunity from prosecution for his efforts to overturn the 2020 election, two courts have issued rulings striking down this purported right, recognizing that one can have a democracy or a dictatorship, but not both.

We cannot accept former President Trump’s claim that a President has unbounded authority to commit crimes that would neutralize the most fundamental check on executive power – the recognition and implementation of election results,” states the unanimous opinion of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, issued this past February, upholding a lower court’s take on the question. “Nor can we sanction his apparent contention that the Executive has carte blanche to violate the rights of individual citizens to vote and have their votes cast.”

You can’t well keep a republic if it’s effectively legal to overthrow it. But at  oral arguments last week, conservative justices on the Supreme Court – which took up the case rather than cosign the February ruling – appeared desperate to make the simple appear complex. Justice Samuel Alito, an appointee of former President George W. Bush, argued that accountability was what would actually lead to lawlessness.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 55 points 6 months ago (5 children)

If the Court decides that the President has unbound authority then why shouldn't Joe Biden shoot Donald Trump with a gun? It's not illegal when the President does it!

[–] baldingpudenda@lemmy.world 50 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Biden could also argue that trump was a threat to America and its democracy.

[–] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 41 points 6 months ago

He wouldn't be wrong.

[–] Bob_Robertson_IX@discuss.tchncs.de 30 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Or maybe Biden could just have Seal Team 6 take out several Supreme Court Justices?

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 9 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Came here to say this. I wonder how Trollito would answer that very direct question?

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 5 points 6 months ago

For extra impact, have Seal Team 6 second the president's lawyers/entourage whatever it's called and deliver the question. In full gear.

[–] treefrog@lemm.ee 16 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (2 children)

Even if it's not illegal, and even if Joe Biden was okay with it ethically, politically he'd be turning Trump into a martyr and giving the right a lot of propaganda with which to incite civil war.

My guess, based on messaging to their base, they've already planned for this.

[–] Dkarma@lemmy.world 18 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Stop saying this. They'd forget about him in 6 months

[–] treefrog@lemm.ee 12 points 6 months ago (1 children)

If he loses the election, sure. If he ends up in prison, sure. If Biden kills him?

Nah, they'll forget about him when Fox News and the rest of the oligarchs decide using him as a martyr is no longer useful for stirring up civil unrest and solidifying their own power.

[–] PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Nah, they'll forget about him when Fox News and the rest of the oligarchs decide using him as a martyr is no longer useful

I mean, if the Supreme Court ruled in Trump’s favor, Biden could have assassinated (or heavily implied he was considering assassinating) those oligarchs too. Just assign a seal team to follow Rupert Murdoch around. If Trump has already been assassinated, Murdoch will get the message real quick.

[–] Natanael 1 points 6 months ago

Unfortunately Murdoch isn't alone in pushing it, not by far

[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago

You don't understand the depth of need to worship something. Neither do I but I'm starting to understand.

[–] tsonfeir@lemm.ee 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

What signaling, and who is “they,” and what is “this?”

[–] treefrog@lemm.ee 6 points 6 months ago (1 children)

They is the GOP. This is the context of the comment I was replying too, "What's to stop Biden from shooting Trump?"

The signaling/messaging is the inciting of a civil war, calling Trump's indictments a witch hunt, the doubt the SC is casting on Trump's crimes, the 2020 election being 'stolen' etc. etc. etc.

Trump isn't the end game. He's the pawn of men who have been plotting this for decades. And the SC are just more pieces in the game.

The money behind the strategy isn't attached to Trump. If Biden has him killed, they already have a contingency in place. Or they wouldn't risk letting the SC open the door in the first place.

[–] tsonfeir@lemm.ee 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

The last thing we need is people in power having their running mates murdered.

[–] Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Tell that to conservatives. They insist upon it.

[–] Natanael 2 points 6 months ago

Just wait until the penny finally drops for him. Or was it a Pence?

[–] Neato@ttrpg.network 4 points 6 months ago

At that point Biden should sent every Republican to Gitmo. Appoint new SCOTUS judges that go and make that previous ruling null. Then he can't be charged because it wasn't a crime when he did it. Maybe that'll humble Republicans...hah yeah probably not.

[–] CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 6 months ago (2 children)

The main issue isn't necessarily the ethics of this.

It's that the Republicans and the Democrats have different bases.

Biden doing this would likely alienate moderate democrats, with many in the house/senate voting to support any impeachment inquiry. The same is not true for any Republican today.

Their base has literally been "At least it's not a democrat."

[–] AlwaysNowNeverNotMe@kbin.social 3 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Idk the use of authoritarian power to suppress your enemies seems to get republicans off.

I imagine it would be like when a local sports team is suddenly good and they pretend they were fans all along. They're in this for the spectacle, they just want to bray as loud as the people trying to talk.

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 1 points 6 months ago

Biden's base is "at least he's not Trump" so I'm not sure.