Play Nice 45th President of the United States: Donald Trump - Part 19: Law and Odour

[ShanDog]

Mod Notice
* Thread monitored actively. User who drag it down will be removed

Specifically: reference to TDS (Trump Derangement Syndrome) and its counterpart 'Trumpanzee' or anything similar will no longer be allowed.

Personal attacks are also to be kept to a minimum.

As always, please submit ideas for the thread title by tagging Gethelred! Congrats to Nikita Blue for our new thread title!

Joe Biden, 46th President Thread is over there ->

< - Trump Part 18 is back there.

 

[Festerz]

To draw legal comparison between the immunity decision of the US Supreme Court and Crown immunity afforded in Commonwealth countries misses he point both politically and morally. Let alone the vast difference in the evolution of the constraints of monarchial power over the Parliament that exists in constitutional monarchies like the UK compared with the US political system. (Refer Exhibit A: The execution of Charles I on Parliamentary decree)

I think it's worth reflecting on the minority opinion of the three dissent opinions of Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Ketanji Brown Jackson and Elena Kagan who warned that the ruling could give Trump the power to assassinate rivals and order military coups in the future. Especially in the critical context of a rapidly eroding respect for the fundamentals of justice and democracy within the US political system.

Writing on behalf of the three dissenting justices, Sotomayor described the dangers thus:

“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. Orders the Navy’s Seal Team 6 to assassinate a political rival? Immune. Organises a military coup to hold onto power? Immune. Takes a bribe in exchange for a pardon? Immune. Immune, immune, immune,”

“Even if these nightmare scenarios never play out, and I pray they never do, the damage has been done. The relationship between the president and the people he serves has shifted irrevocably. In every use of official power, the president is now a king above the law.”

 

[Barrybran]

MASA

Make America South America

Catchy.

PTBIO

Putin Trump Back In Office

 

[swingdog]

To draw legal comparison between the immunity decision of the US Supreme Court and Crown immunity afforded in Commonwealth countries misses he point both politically and morally. Let alone the vast difference in the evolution of the constraints of monarchial power over the Parliament that exists in constitutional monarchies like the UK compared with the US political system.

I think it's worth reflecting on the minority opinion of the three dissent opinions of Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Ketanji Brown Jackson and Elena Kagan who warned that the ruling could give Trump the power to assassinate rivals and order military coups in the future. Especially in the critical context of a rapidly eroding respect for the fundamentals of justice and democracy within the US political system.

The potential con

Writing on behalf of the three dissenting justices, Sotomayor described the dangers thus:

“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. Orders the Navy’s Seal Team 6 to assassinate a political rival? Immune. Organises a military coup to hold onto power? Immune. Takes a bribe in exchange for a pardon? Immune. Immune, immune, immune,”

“Even if these nightmare scenarios never play out, and I pray they never do, the damage has been done. The relationship between the president and the people he serves has shifted irrevocably. In every use of official power, the president is now a king above the law.”

The problem is the US political system has been based on a set of norms. The idea that nobody would do such a thing.

That’s pretty much obviously out the door now. Trump’s historical breakthrough is that he doesn’t care about norms that disadvantage him.

Rather, he is establishing a new norm of what is considered acceptable behavior. That is, if I want it, it’s acceptable. If I can make it officially acceptable, it’s now legal.

 

[Baldur]

The Monarch is immune from all criminal prosecution, and civil actions.

The Royal family are only immune to civil arrest:



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_immunity

In Criminal proceedings in Australia, the cases are conducted as 'R (the Crown) v (the accused)'.

You can't have a criminal proceeding where its 'R' v 'R' (the Crown prosecuting itself).

In reality, should Charles or anyone else engage in a blatant Criminal or Civil wrong, it's likely immunity would be waived by the Royal Family in any event (or they would pay out the wronged party via a large settlement).

Yea immunity did Charles 1st at lot of good. In theory the Monarch is immune, but a king can be replaced and is no longer immune, unless the people in charge want him to be. In the end it is a political issue.

My concern with the judgement is not immunity per say, but the scope and absoluteness they put on it. They could have and should have given limited immunity for legitimate offical actions done as a part of presidents legitimate offical duties. Refuse to give any guidance whatsoever on what either legitimate or offical means.

Then send it back to the lower court. Should Trump become president, the question is moot. Should he not, then they say when forced to it that attempting to interfere with the peaceful transfer of power is not part of the offical acts of a president.

 

[Balls In]

I thought they would do something like this, but they have made the bounds of the protection an order of magnitude wider than I believed they would in my nightmares. Fools blinded by their arrogance believe that the leopard will not eat their faces.

This ensures there will be no trial on the events of Jan 6th before the election. Instead, there will be a long process of deciding what acts were official. Appeals on said, evidence thrown out as unusable due to being part of an official act. He now is unlikely to ever be convicted re Jan 6th.

Trump will believe that he can do anything he likes, ANYTHING. Sure the decision does not protect unoffical acts, but does anybody think Trump will care about or even understand that some acts of the person who is president are not offical acts of the president. If he becomes president again, expect him to go full Mussolini from day one.

As always with Trump, complaints are projection, the justice department has been weaponised, a president is fully immune if he orders the justice department to go after somebody with made-up cases. Furthermore, his blackshirts will know the supreme court has his back & they will believe he has theirs, should they overstep than he can pardon them. Note even if he loses in Nov they will try to steal the election, they might succeed.

The decision made official acts so wide and the protection so strong that a stake has been driven into the heart of democracy in the US. Even if Trump fails to become president again, the next would-be dictator has been impowered. This reminds me of the Dred Scott v Sandford decision, a decision that lit the fuse of the civil war.

We live in interesting times.

What do you think would happen if the SCOTUS removed legal protections for presidents? You would see lawfare explode and it would end with an unelected administrative state removing and installing presidents at their leisure. No need for elections.

Also this is exactly why there was around 300 years of president to not pursue a precident criminally on such flimsy basis. The Dems forced this own goal by trying this shit on in the first place. A rogue president can still be removed through impeachment.

 

[Festerz]

That’s pretty much obviously out the door now. Trump’s historical breakthrough is that he doesn’t care about norms that disadvantage him.

And while the effect such immunity offers to a pathological narcissist like Donald Trump is understandably the immediate concern, the long term threat posed globally by the Supreme Court decision in ratcheting up executive authority in a nuclear superpower cannot be over-stated

It gives the person with the control of the nuclear football even greater authority to act with homicidal and criminal impunity based on a whim.

 

[Baldur]

What do you think would happen if the SCOTUS removed legal protections for presidents? You would see lawfare explode and it would end with an unelected administrative state removing and installing presidents at their leisure. No need for elections.

Also this is exactly why there was around 300 years of president to not pursue a president criminally on such flimsy basis. The Dems forced this own goal by trying this shit on in the first place. A rogue president can still be removed through impeachment.

An attempted coup is hardly a flimsy basis. The very first president to attempt to overturn the result of an election by violent means in 300 years. See my post above yours that what I think they should they have done. Which does not involve no legal protection.

I will now put you on ignore as I have no desire to interact with cooked fools.

 

[bourbons]

What do you think would happen if the SCOTUS removed legal protections for presidents? You would see lawfare explode and it would end with an unelected administrative state removing and installing presidents at their leisure. No need for elections.

I find the idea that presidents simply cannot do their jobs without breaking established federal laws perplexing. Seems like a Trump thing rather than a POTUS thing, to understate it somewhat lol

Also this is exactly why there was around 300 years of president to not pursue a president criminally on such flimsy basis. The Dems forced this own goal by trying this shit on in the first place.

Around 200 years of actual functional adults being president before Donnie came along, you mean. As swingdog just said above, quite a bit more of the US system than you notice at first glance seems to have been based on sets of norms, which Trump and the current incarnation of the GOP are more than happy to blow up for their own benefit.

Think I might have asked you this before - what would you propose as a consequence for a POTUS involved in a fake elector scheme, asking state reps to find votes and flip states, and pressuring their VP to not certify the result? Absolutely nothing? Thought I'd ask again, seeing as you're clearly concerned about duly elected presidents being removed and no need for elections.

A rogue president can still be removed through impeachment.

Not with this sniveling lickspittle GOP lol. Another one of those norms I was talking about - previously you'd assume congress are actual functioning adults, whereas in reality they are now Marj Greene, Lauren Boebert, Matt Gaetz and a heap of others of the same ilk. These people literally would not vote to impeach dear leader if he was on video killing someone, you know this.

And Mitch McConnell disagrees with you fwiw. Stated courts exist as a remedy for illegality as a rationale for his non support of the 2nd impeachment.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

What do you think would happen if the SCOTUS removed legal protections for presidents? You would see lawfare explode and it would end with an unelected administrative state removing and installing presidents at their leisure. No need for elections.

Also this is exactly why there was around 300 years of president to not pursue a president criminally on such flimsy basis. The Dems forced this own goal by trying this shit on in the first place. A rogue president can still be removed through impeachment.

Have you seen Episode 3 - Revenge of the Sith?

 

[Strange Cat]

Have you seen Episode 3 - Revenge of the Sith?

This timeline is starting to feel more like the Acolyte than episode 3 tbh

 

[Spearman]

Oh I dunno Mexico still make their Coca Cola with cane sugar unlike the US who use corn syrup. Could be very attractive to the average MAGA.

good, then they'll go willingly.

 

[Spearman]

I have no words left ….the apathy by the general population over there towards project 2025 and what is occurring right before their eyes is just amazing

Interesting times indeed

The ones that actual watch some news get opiates from Fox, Sinclair, and the others. They have no clue.
The others are literally no more aware than medieval peasants. They live in their little bubbles and bend in whatever breeze gets to them. If they actually cared enough to take in all of it, both sides of it, I think they would have something to say. But they aren't so they won't.

 

[Spearman]

The problem is the US political system has been based on a set of norms. The idea that nobody would do such a thing.

That’s pretty much obviously out the door now. Trump’s historical breakthrough is that he doesn’t care about norms that disadvantage him.

Rather, he is establishing a new norm of what is considered acceptable behavior. That is, if I want it, it’s acceptable. If I can make it officially acceptable, it’s now legal.

This many times over. SCOTUS has merely agreed with the norms of the past. POTUSs routinely used plausible deniability, and tacit support from other branches to do stuff. They were the curbs and brakes in the system. Nixon gone done because he lost the Congressional GOP.
Trump, besides finding some other ways to surprise, will put levers in place that will smooth whatever opposition there will be to his Orbanization of the government.
Most Americans that vote GOP for rusted on reasons, are frogs in the simmering water.

 

[E Shed]

I can imagine Mike & Marge MAGA with their Trump flag out front when the jackboots hit the street & they realize they can’t vote him out.

 

[Spearman]

Yea immunity did Charles 1st at lot of good. In theory the Monarch is immune, but a king can be replaced and is no longer immune, unless the people in charge want him to be. In the end it is a political issue.

My concern with the judgement is not immunity per say, but the scope and absoluteness they put on it. They could have and should have given limited immunity for legitimate offical actions done as a part of presidents legitimate offical duties. Refuse to give any guidance whatsoever on what either legitimate or offical means.

Then send it back to the lower court. Should Trump become president, the question is moot. Should he not, then they say when forced to it that attempting to interfere with the peaceful transfer of power is not part of the offical acts of a president.

Yep, they punted, while giving red meat to the zombies.
It's okay if it is official, except when it is not official. So then, what is official?

And again its 6-3.

 

[Malifice]

My concern with the judgement is not immunity per say, but the scope and absoluteness they put on it. They could have and should have given limited immunity for legitimate offical actions done as a part of presidents legitimate offical duties. Refuse to give any guidance whatsoever on what either legitimate or official means.

It was a rather uncontroversial decision for mine. The DOJ in the USA had for decades been working under the assumption of Sovereign immunity for the Prez.

It's why they stopped short of recommending any criminal prosecution for the Russian collusion.

The SCOTUS effectively did give immunity, but only when the President is performing his Constitutional duties (as head of the Executive branch).

These are clearly outlined in the US Constitution:

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.

He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper; he shall receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers; he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States.

https://constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/articles/article-ii

As head of the Executive he also has other powers (signing Bills into Acts or refusing to do so via Veto, running and issuing directives to the rest of the Executive branch, meeting foreign heads of State etc).

Again, to use an example, the President could (in times of war, and in exercise of his function as Commander in chief of the Armed forces) order a US citizen, levying war against the USA be assassinated without trial, and not face Criminal prosecution for murder (something that would happen if anyone else ordered someone to kill another person).

Barrack Obama did just this, ordering the murder of a few US citizens who were fighting for ISIS.

Sovereign immunity exists for a reason.

Where it crosses the line, is where the President purports to use his immunity in furtherance of an aim outside of his Constitutional duties (for example, ordering the assassination of a political rival, for no other reason other than to win an election).

The latter example is outside the scope of his official duties.

Now its back to the lower courts to determine if 'conspiring to ignore an election result, and install himself as President in defiance of the vote' fits within the scope of his Presidential duties.

 

[GreyCrow]

Now its back to the lower courts to determine if 'conspiring to ignore an election result, and install himself as President in defiance of the vote' fits within the scope of his Presidential duties.

Depends on how it is framed

We have seen an inkling of the path to this in his '' it was rigged and I was protecting it'' commentary

Now some would argue '' it has now been proven not to be rigged'' but his fallback is ' at the time I thought'

Yet his consistency of behaviour - Raffenberg , Pence etc - shows he went outside that scope

 

[Spearman]

Depends on how it is framed

We have seen an inkling of the path to this in his '' it was rigged and I was protecting it'' commentary

Now some would argue '' it has now been proven not to be rigged'' but his fallback is ' at the time I thought'

Yet his consistency of behaviour - Raffenberg , Pence etc - shows he went outside that scope

Yes, and then the legal wrangling. Regardless of how obvious it is, the process would take many years, investigation, hearings, lawsuits, motion ad nauseum. It will come down to whether Congress will act with or against him. DoJ most likely captured.

 

[Strange Cat]

If it was just America that will suffer I wouldn’t be too worried about what happens over there , but the repercussions for a faccist America globally is frightening to think about

 

[Malifice]

Yes, and then the legal wrangling. Regardless of how obvious it is, the process would take many years, investigation, hearings, lawsuits, motion ad nauseum. It will come down to whether Congress will act with or against him. DoJ most likely captured.

No, it simply wont matter.

Trump can (as President) direct the DOJ however he wants. This included directing them to drop the case against himself.

He can also issue Pardons for any crime. Arguably to himself.

It's effectively a dead letter case now.

The SCOTUS was trying to push the case back till after the elections for this very reason. They've succeeded.

 

[Malifice]

What's ****ing hilarious is the Trump-ites and Tea Party numpties cheering this decision on.

These are the same people that parrot on about the 2A existing to protect them from Government tyranny, and bemoaning corruption at the highest level, and demanding 'lock her/ him up' for Pence and Clinton remember. Crying about government overreach and shit. Sovereign citizen types.

Now the SCOTUS has officially ruled the POTUS (and the rest of the Executive arm) can literally murder them in their beds at night while they sleep and be free from Criminal prosecution, and they're blindly cheering it on.

That's a serious logic disconnect right there.

 

[Malifice]

Is any one else a little worried by what Trump is going to do when he gets in office again in November having regard to this decision?

 

[Strange Cat]

Is any one else a little worried by what Trump is going to do when he gets in office again in November having regard to this decision?

He’s been very clear that he’s a dictator on day 1 …we are in for a world of shit

 

[Satan]

Is any one else a little worried by what Trump is going to do when he gets in office again in November having regard to this decision?

just a tad

 

[Leon]

. A rogue president can still be removed through impeachment.

Pretty sure impeachment was already tried on a rogue president, when he:

a) Tried to blackmail the president of Ukraine into giving him dirt on his political opponent (with ample evidence that he did it - the Republicans, laughably, wouldn’t allow witnesses in his trial for this)

b) Incited a riot at the Capitol (6 people killed) based on pathetic and baseless lies over a stolen election.


The Republicans twice had the chance to rid America of this lunatic and twice squibbed it because they’re so pathetic and spineless.

Though apparently we’re meant to give Mike Pence a gold star and call him a hero because he upheld the Constitution.

Yay, you go Mike! You upheld the Constitution, you’re a hero!

Excuse me while I go give the mailman a gold star and call him a hero for delivering the mail.