US Election, November 2024
- Thread starter les24preludes
- Start date
matthewr
spɹɐʍʞɔɐq spɹoɔǝɹ ɹnoʎ sʎɐld
The last week feels like living in an episode of The Fall of Civilisations podcast and any minute now our smooth toned narrator is going to turn up to do a few interviews so he can report to future generations what it was like to be alive at this time.
Fantastic podcast by the way. Much better than whatever the feck it is that is happening now is.
www.youtube.com
Fantastic podcast by the way. Much better than whatever the feck it is that is happening now is.
Fall of Civilizations
A podcast about the collapse of civilizations throughout history. Why do civilizations collapse? What happens afterwards? And what did it feel like to watch it happen?
www.youtube.com
Subito
pfm Member
It’s just business. In my dear old USA, when you buy a judge they stay bought. America, f*** yeah!
DonQuixote99
pfm Member
There could be a lot of complication in determining what a 'core constitutional power' is, if Biden were to start getting wild with his immunity. Not so much in Trump's case--his judges will just use this ruling as a pretext to rubber-stamp whatever he's doing
DonQuixote99
pfm Member
At this point would there be anything illegal in Biden officially ordering the payment of very large gratuities to the Supreme Court justices? Simply as the thanks of a grateful nation for the Presidential Immunity ruling, you understand. A reasonable justice might just conclude there would be future gratuities as well, if the President, on behalf of the nation, had further cause to be grateful.
Yank
Bulbous Also Tapered
Yet the worst of them were nominated by GHWB and GWB, Presidents who would be slagged-off as RINOs today.
SteveS1
I heard that, pardon?
Before the wrist slitting starts in the face of this horrendous development, there are a couple of aspects that will not play well for Trump.
SC overreach has not gone well in elections see the turnover of Roe v Wade for perhaps the most recent high level example, but there have been lesser rulings recently that have also not played well at the various ballot boxes since 2022. You can bet this will add to those.
Next, in Trump’s trial Judge Chutkhan's 80 day allowance for his defence for a full trial will not apply to the evidentiary hearing that the SC has now ordered her to do to determine official v non-official acts. A stream of witnesses including his own Vice-President Pence having to give evidence (think Jan 6th Committee) in September/October very publicly, will re-raise very clear and graphic impressions again of how Trump will use being above the Law. Not exactly helpful to Trump’s campaign right at the time that most of the electorate are tuning in.
As Matthew alluded to earlier, Justice Sotomayer’s superbly writted dissent is well worth a read in full and should definitely form the basis for the election campaign response.
Interesting that the only real shred of dissent from one of the six was from Trump appointee Amy Coney Barrett, given that she had no problem with giving misleading answers when questioned in her confirmation hearing, it just illustrates what disgusting individuals the other five are, including the Chief Justice, Roberts, who some held to be not on the Thomas/Alito level of extremism.
SC overreach has not gone well in elections see the turnover of Roe v Wade for perhaps the most recent high level example, but there have been lesser rulings recently that have also not played well at the various ballot boxes since 2022. You can bet this will add to those.
Next, in Trump’s trial Judge Chutkhan's 80 day allowance for his defence for a full trial will not apply to the evidentiary hearing that the SC has now ordered her to do to determine official v non-official acts. A stream of witnesses including his own Vice-President Pence having to give evidence (think Jan 6th Committee) in September/October very publicly, will re-raise very clear and graphic impressions again of how Trump will use being above the Law. Not exactly helpful to Trump’s campaign right at the time that most of the electorate are tuning in.
As Matthew alluded to earlier, Justice Sotomayer’s superbly writted dissent is well worth a read in full and should definitely form the basis for the election campaign response.
Interesting that the only real shred of dissent from one of the six was from Trump appointee Amy Coney Barrett, given that she had no problem with giving misleading answers when questioned in her confirmation hearing, it just illustrates what disgusting individuals the other five are, including the Chief Justice, Roberts, who some held to be not on the Thomas/Alito level of extremism.
ks.234
Half way to Infinity
A doctrine that the War of Independence fought against?
SCOTUS: homeless people can’t sleep outside; we can’t forgive student debt; women don’t have autonomy over their bodies; the EPA can’t regulate the water; POTUS can assassinate his political opponent - and, oh, feel free to 'gift' us, we're not paid enough.
HCR:
Today, observers illustrated what Trump’s newly declared immunity could mean. Political scientist Norm Ornstein pointed out that Trump could “order his handpicked FBI Director to arrest and jail his political opponents. He can order the IRS to put liens on the property of media companies who criticize him and jail reporters and editors.” Legal analyst Joyce White Vance noted that a president with such broad immunity could order the assassination of Supreme Court justices, and retired military leader Mark Hertling wrote that he was “trying to figure out how a commander can refuse an illegal order from someone who is issuing it as an official act.”
Asha Rangappa wrote: “According to the Court, a President could literally provide the leader of a hostile adversary with intelligence needed to win a conflict in which we are involved, or even attack or invade the U.S., and not be prosecuted for treason, because negotiating with heads of state is an exclusive Art. II function. In case you were wondering.” Trump is currently under indictment for retaining classified documents. “The Court has handed Trump, if he wins this November, carte blanche to be a ‘dictator on day one,’ and the ability to use every lever of official power at his disposal for his personal ends without any recourse,” Rangappa wrote. “This election is now a clear-cut decision between democracy and autocracy. Vote accordingly.”
HCR:
Today, observers illustrated what Trump’s newly declared immunity could mean. Political scientist Norm Ornstein pointed out that Trump could “order his handpicked FBI Director to arrest and jail his political opponents. He can order the IRS to put liens on the property of media companies who criticize him and jail reporters and editors.” Legal analyst Joyce White Vance noted that a president with such broad immunity could order the assassination of Supreme Court justices, and retired military leader Mark Hertling wrote that he was “trying to figure out how a commander can refuse an illegal order from someone who is issuing it as an official act.”
Asha Rangappa wrote: “According to the Court, a President could literally provide the leader of a hostile adversary with intelligence needed to win a conflict in which we are involved, or even attack or invade the U.S., and not be prosecuted for treason, because negotiating with heads of state is an exclusive Art. II function. In case you were wondering.” Trump is currently under indictment for retaining classified documents. “The Court has handed Trump, if he wins this November, carte blanche to be a ‘dictator on day one,’ and the ability to use every lever of official power at his disposal for his personal ends without any recourse,” Rangappa wrote. “This election is now a clear-cut decision between democracy and autocracy. Vote accordingly.”
Tony L
Administrator
I suspect it is Civil War #2 time soon. If I lived there I’d be factoring the need to fight fascists on the streets was a distinct possibility over the next five or ten years. Especially true for any already marginalised or demonised groups. I have a feeling this SCOTUS decision represents the end of the US constitution as anything other than a historical museum piece. It no longer holds any legal weight.
SteveS1
I heard that, pardon?
Assuming you mean Gretchen Whitmer, that would be very surprising - do you have a link?
NeilR
pfm Member
Pulled out of what?
Running for President.
NeilR
pfm Member
I didn’t even know she was running. Unless Biden steps down, there isn’t a vacancy, surely?
Speculative narrative on who might run if Biden did step down. She is one of the more fancied names on the list. I'm not sure how many of the Dems on that list would want the job anyway even if it did become available. Another issue for the Party.