(July 4, 2024 at 3:30 pm)AFTT47 Wrote:

(July 3, 2024 at 7:12 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: (Bold mine)

Actually, he hasn’t. The Court’s decision grants presidents immunity, not authority. This is an important distinction. 

Boru

Granted. I have to think though that Biden could find a few military members and/or federal agents who would be willing to take on a covert assignment from the President aimed at eliminating national security threats. I'm not going to spell out the nature of the covert assignment(s) I'm talking about but I'm sure you can figure it out.

This may seem like an extreme and unethical act but under the circumstances, I don't think it is. With external threats, the President sends the military. They break things and kill people. It's justified by the righteousness and necessity of national defense. This is the same thing except the threat is from the inside.

How about he doesn't do that and add 'the president you can trust not to go nuts with the excessive power he's been granted' as a selling point. Because he's not going to do that. We purposesly elected a guy who wouldn't do that.

-and that's why the dems and the country..hell, the world, have been losing.

-not that I think he actually could..mind you.  If he tested it we'd find that it's another narrow ruling.  Good for one president and republicans only.

(July 5, 2024 at 10:00 am)Mister Agenda Wrote:

(July 4, 2024 at 3:30 pm)AFTT47 Wrote: Granted. I have to think though that Biden could find a few military members and/or federal agents who would be willing to take on a covert assignment from the President aimed at eliminating national security threats. I'm not going to spell out the nature of the covert assignment(s) I'm talking about but I'm sure you can figure it out.

This may seem like an extreme and unethical act but under the circumstances, I don't think it is. With external threats, the President sends the military. They break things and kill people. It's justified by the righteousness and necessity of national defense. This is the same thing except the threat is from the inside.

How about he doesn't do that and add 'the president you can trust not to go nuts with the excessive power he's been granted' as a selling point. Because he's not going to do that.

Oh, I'm sure he's not going to do that. He's too good a man. But I fear we will all regret it. Because Trump is not too good a man. He will delight in that excessive power and use it without regret. And apparently, Americans are stupid enough to elect him.

(July 5, 2024 at 11:42 am)AFTT47 Wrote: Oh, I'm sure he's not going to do that. He's too good a man. But I fear we will all regret it. Because Trump is not too good a man. He will delight in that excessive power and use it without regret. And apparently, Americans are stupid enough to elect him.

Directly to your point:

Quote:Ethics and legal experts warn that the Supreme Court has struck a serious blow to prosecutors’ ability to crack down on the abuse of power and public corruption.

And that’s ringing alarm bells when Donald Trump, who was convicted in May by a Manhattan jury on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records and who was hit with a $355 million penalty in a civil fraud trial in February, is leading in the presidential race.

Experts say the Supreme Court’s decision last week in Snyder v. United States, which narrowed the scope of what can be considered an illegal gratuity to a government official, could make it tougher to prosecute federal officials for accepting bribes. It also may give ammunition to embattled Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.), who is on trial on federal bribery charges in New York.

And experts warn that the 6-3 majority opinion in Trump v. United States, which gave the former president immunity for crimes connected to his official acts, will make it tougher to convict Trump on charges related to the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol and could embolden future presidents to skirt criminal laws.

They say the court’s decision in Trump v. U.S. would make it nearly impossible to convict a future president for taking a bribe once he leaves office, because it would limit the introduction of official presidential actions as evidence in a criminal trial.

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/4754...orruption/

I'm more concerned about death squads.

(July 5, 2024 at 12:47 pm)AFTT47 Wrote: I'm more concerned about death squads.

Right, or judicial railroad jobs, or other acts of violence.

The Biden campaign should be pushing the narrative that anyone even considering voting for Trump should honestly and seriously consider why any president would think he needs immunity from prosecution when no other president has ever felt that need. I know the mouth-breathing, kool-aid drinkers will spout conspiracy theories, or just vote the party like they always do regardless, but maybe, just maybe, they can swing enough votes from fence sitters and the few remaining honest republicans, to make a difference.

Or, maybe I'm just smoking crack, and America's turn at straining under the yoke of fascist oppression has come. The only silver lining I really see at this point, is that the effective half-life of evil is usually relatively short. I'm old enough that my life will probably not be significantly affected, but I weep for the youth who will suffer for the sins of their fathers.

The worst part is, even should the lesser evil win the day, it's just four more years and we get to suffer through yet another threat to what's left of Democracy in America, if it manages to survive that time with the current SCOTUS, as the center-right wastes that time trying to play nice with the fascist-right.

Due to the SCOTUS immunity decision, Judge Cannon issues a stay on Trump’s classified documents case, proving the ruling is already serving to protect him from facing justice.

But don’t worry, President Biden‘s debate performance is still the lead story.