“I didn’t expect such a broad definition of absolute immunity for a president for criminal acts,” said Berkeley Law Dean Erwin Chemerinsky, one of the nation’s preeminent constitutional scholars. “While the court leaves many issues unresolved, it is a dramatic and stunning affirmation of broad, absolute immunity for a president.”
Berkeley political scientist Terri Bimes, a scholar in the history and operation of the U.S. presidency, called the court’s ruling “dangerous.”
“The decision seems to permit the president to use the power of the office to commit acts that are illegal, that are criminal,” Bimes said. “The fact that these actions are being taken in the name of the presidency, that they’re official acts, makes them immune from prosecution. That is really problematic.”
It’s provenly NOT absolute immunity. Stop with the extremism. It’s dangerous. Yes, but he cannot make goon squads to go murderizing people at will.
Stop with the sensationalism. It only dilutes the water.
This term was the most significant in memory because, in Trump v. United States, [the Court] hard-wired the imperial presidency by granting what in practice is close to absolute immunity from criminal prosecution to presidents who wield their power corruptly and self-servingly;
Or how about I quote the decision itself?
Held: Under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of Presidential power entitles a former President to absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority. And he is entitled to at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts. There is no immunity for unofficial acts. Pp. 5–43.
It's not impossible for him to be prosecuted, but the legal barrier is sky high and in most cases not practical. Acknowledge it.
He cannot murder people or have them murdered and not face consequences.
I’m not discussing this with you any further. Your feelings are entirely irrelevant.
My feelings have never been relevant. The facts are the facts, pound sand.
Your interlocutor brought sources. You brought gaslighting and personal attacks and frankly lies.
The pro-genocide wing of the Democratic Party is intellectually bankrupt in addition to being morally bankrupt.
pRo gEnoCiDe!
This is why I don’t take you seriously.
Centrism distilled. The only things you have to back up the excuses you call arguments are ridicule, baseless accusations, gaslighting and abuse. Like I said, intellectually bankrupt.
Your hypocrisy is impressive. What’s more impressive is your inability to even notice it. It reminds me a lot of MAGA. You seem to share a lot of similarities.
Everything reminds you of MAGA.
No… just people like you. But I get how you think you are everything. Both you and MAGA forget that there are other people that exist in the world.
Because… The world was created for you and you alone.
And, go ahead and note how I have never once in my entire comment history accused ALL of anyone of anything. It’s because:
I don’t make blanket statements- like you do.
I don’t make assumptions of an entire political ideology- like you do.
I don’t falsely accuse entire political ideologies of shit they’re not doing- like you do. (Don’t deny this- your comment history serves as proof for anyone to see)
I don’t victimize myself by rewording the systems of others- like you do.
Your comment history is rife with constant accusations of shit that is easily proven wrong- while what I say about you and those like YOU, and JUST YOU and those like YOU, no one else. No other group- not leftists, not everyone I disagree with, no one but YOU and the few like YOU here to disrupt-
… is seemingly shared by many people here. So as the saying goes, if you smell shit, and everyone else in the room isn’t shit….
Both you and MAGA forget that there are other people that exist in the world.
You've spent this entire thread making excuses for Biden's support for genocide. Gazans aren't people to you? Have you forgotten they exist?
Your opponent brought sources and you replied with abuse. As you do. I hope I've taken some of the heat so you're not still abusing someone for being right and bringing receipts.
I judge ideologies in part based on their results. For example, Republicans are shit because they ban books, are openly corrupt and bigoted, they weren't up to the task of responding to a pandemic, oppose universal healthcare, oppose workplace safety standards, support abusive police, support things like Uganda's law that makes homosexuality punishable by death, support cruelty to refugees, support genocide in Gaza, January 6, the list goes on and on. But there ain't a lot of Republicans here, despite your feigned paranoia that people to your left are actually maga bots.
There are a lot of centrists here, and centrism should also be judged by its results. Where those results are reprehensible, I will call them such. When an ideology results in supplying weapons for an ongoing genocide, that ideology is morally bankrupt. When the adherents of that ideology reliably make insultingly bad excuses for it and lob abuse at people who provide sources that contradict their excuses, that's a hallmark of intellectual bankruptcy.
Now instead of talking about the issue at hand, you've pivoted to something you're far more comfortable doing: ad hominem attacks.
And when I point out what you're doing, you accuse me of playing the victim. It's easier than defending that which you know is indefensible.
Got a TLDR version? I don’t take you seriously enough to read that mess.
It's certainly clear that you didn't arrive at your present positions by reading, yes.
There's disagreement among scholars.
It’s provenly NOT absolute immunity. Stop with the extremism. It’s dangerous. Yes, but he cannot make goon squads to go murderizing people at will.
Stop with the sensationalism. It only dilutes the water.
Okay, Berkley won't do it for you, how about Harvard Law?
Or how about I quote the decision itself?
It's not impossible for him to be prosecuted, but the legal barrier is sky high and in most cases not practical. Acknowledge it.
He cannot murder people or have them murdered and not face consequences.
I’m not discussing this with you any further. Your feelings are entirely irrelevant.
My feelings have never been relevant. The facts are the facts, pound sand.
Your interlocutor brought sources. You brought gaslighting and personal attacks and frankly lies.
The pro-genocide wing of the Democratic Party is intellectually bankrupt in addition to being morally bankrupt.
pRo gEnoCiDe!
This is why I don’t take you seriously.
Centrism distilled. The only things you have to back up the excuses you call arguments are ridicule, baseless accusations, gaslighting and abuse. Like I said, intellectually bankrupt.
Your hypocrisy is impressive. What’s more impressive is your inability to even notice it. It reminds me a lot of MAGA. You seem to share a lot of similarities.
Everything reminds you of MAGA.
No… just people like you. But I get how you think you are everything. Both you and MAGA forget that there are other people that exist in the world.
Because… The world was created for you and you alone.
And, go ahead and note how I have never once in my entire comment history accused ALL of anyone of anything. It’s because:
I don’t make blanket statements- like you do.
I don’t make assumptions of an entire political ideology- like you do.
I don’t falsely accuse entire political ideologies of shit they’re not doing- like you do. (Don’t deny this- your comment history serves as proof for anyone to see)
I don’t victimize myself by rewording the systems of others- like you do.
Your comment history is rife with constant accusations of shit that is easily proven wrong- while what I say about you and those like YOU, and JUST YOU and those like YOU, no one else. No other group- not leftists, not everyone I disagree with, no one but YOU and the few like YOU here to disrupt-
… is seemingly shared by many people here. So as the saying goes, if you smell shit, and everyone else in the room isn’t shit….
You've spent this entire thread making excuses for Biden's support for genocide. Gazans aren't people to you? Have you forgotten they exist?
Your opponent brought sources and you replied with abuse. As you do. I hope I've taken some of the heat so you're not still abusing someone for being right and bringing receipts.
I judge ideologies in part based on their results. For example, Republicans are shit because they ban books, are openly corrupt and bigoted, they weren't up to the task of responding to a pandemic, oppose universal healthcare, oppose workplace safety standards, support abusive police, support things like Uganda's law that makes homosexuality punishable by death, support cruelty to refugees, support genocide in Gaza, January 6, the list goes on and on. But there ain't a lot of Republicans here, despite your feigned paranoia that people to your left are actually maga bots.
There are a lot of centrists here, and centrism should also be judged by its results. Where those results are reprehensible, I will call them such. When an ideology results in supplying weapons for an ongoing genocide, that ideology is morally bankrupt. When the adherents of that ideology reliably make insultingly bad excuses for it and lob abuse at people who provide sources that contradict their excuses, that's a hallmark of intellectual bankruptcy.
Now instead of talking about the issue at hand, you've pivoted to something you're far more comfortable doing: ad hominem attacks.
And when I point out what you're doing, you accuse me of playing the victim. It's easier than defending that which you know is indefensible.
Got a TLDR version? I don’t take you seriously enough to read that mess.
It's certainly clear that you didn't arrive at your present positions by reading, yes.