• @UnpopularCrow
    link
    3263 months ago

    No need to. Biden can have the 6 corrupt justices killed. He has the immunity and he can pick new justices. If members of the senate refuse to put the new justices on the bench, have them killed too. No rules anymore.

    • TunaCowboy
      link
      963 months ago

      Strategically speaking liberal politicians are backed into a corner and only have two real options:

      1. Seize control preemptively, promoting conservative conspiracy to prophecy, and likely inciting CW2.

      2. Hand over full control come January and hope they continue to maintain some privilege under a new regime.

      They’re already in check, but more concerned with soliciting large donations and collecting hot stick tips.

      • @TokenBoomer
        link
        533 months ago

        We want them to do option 1, but know they are going to choose option 2.

        • @njm1314
          link
          23
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          When confronted with fascist Threats liberals always blink. They’ll wade through masses of bodies to destroy what they perceive to be a leftist threat, but they don’t stand up to fascists.

          • @TokenBoomer
            link
            113 months ago

            All democracies turn into dictatorships - but not by coup. The people give their democracy to a dictator, whether it’s Julius Caesar or Napoleon or Adolf Hitler. Ultimately, the general population goes along with the idea.

            George Lucas

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              53 months ago

              Didn’t Caesar literally march his army into Rome? ‘crossing the rubicon’ - and then there was a thing called the roman civil war

              • @FanciestPants
                link
                2
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                Yeah. There was also the title, literally “dictator”, that was bestowed on individuals in times of crisis (or perceived crisis), and in some cases the power of the dictator was returned to the republic when the crisis was addressed (see Cincinnatus). Rome had an established process for giving power to the dictator.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          83 months ago

          Go. Start some research, and head out. Many countries you can just enter. Call it a vacation for the first year and see if you like it.

      • @Adalast
        link
        43 months ago

        Liberal politicians do not need to be the ones to make sure #1 happens. The second amendment literally exists so the citizens have the capacity to do that ourselves.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          233 months ago

          200 years ago though, now you’ll get shit stomped by the military. The 2a thing is honestly a joke.

          • @Adalast
            link
            143 months ago

            It wasn’t a joke from me. Democracy dies when the good man does nothing. I am a good man and I will fight for this democracy, as fucked up as it is. The right believes the left to be weak pacifists because we choose compromise, tolerance, and acceptance over bigotry, hate, and subjugation. They will need to learn the hard way that we choose that because we know that mutually beneficial social contracts make living better and provide a safe, prosperous world. They obviously do not want to be party to these social contracts with me, so I will not allow them any of the safety or benefits.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              -13 months ago

              He does, but why would the president tell the army to do nothing when the people are rising up against said president? Nobody is that stupid, any rise up against the government will end with the military curb stomping it in about 15 minutes.

              • @MonkRome
                link
                English
                83 months ago

                Domestic wars are never pretty, no matter how powerful the military. Most people in the military don’t serve to shoot their own country. Countries don’t want to damage their own infrastructure or enflame their own people. Oligarchs won’t support a war that damages their bottom line. People vastly over simply how easy it would be to stop an armed resistance.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  23 months ago

                  Did you see the police step on people during the blm 2020 marches? They have no problem being fascists

                  • @MonkRome
                    link
                    English
                    4
                    edit-2
                    3 months ago

                    Most of those where cops only larping as military. Military operations are a completely different thing. No country wants to fight their own people. Your own logistics, intelligence, supply chains, and financing all rely, in part, on the very people you are fighting… You can’t trust or count on the chain of command at any point, at any point your keys to power can turn on you and you’re dead. Leaders with half a brain know you usually don’t have a long life attacking your own people.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                53 months ago

                Second amendment grants the right to bear arms, arms were used by the insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  -43 months ago

                  What does Iraq and Afghanistan have to do with America and taking arms up against our government? You really think a bunch of hillbillies with guns are going to do shit against our military?

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    33 months ago

                    I’m pretty sure the Taliban could also be described as a “hillbillies with guns” when they started out. And you know what, they won.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        23 months ago

        Option 2 is suicide. I guess that’s it for American Democracy. Of course, option 3 being that the Democrats win every election until the Republican party collapses. At which point the Democratic party will likely split, with one part becoming a moderate party, and the other half absorbing the remains of the Republican party.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      463 months ago

      The quickest way to save the country would be for Biden to kill the 6 justices that ruled in favour of immunity (and I’m pretty sure they wouldn’t even mind since they’re the ones that made it legal), install 6 liberal judges and the new court can overturn every ruling the corrupt court made. Which means Biden would probably end up in prison, but hey, it’s a small price to pay for democracy.

      • @TokenBoomer
        link
        373 months ago

        Why would he end up in prison? It would not have been a crime when he committed it. That’s what immunity means.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          15
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Yep. They made an official ruling, Biden acts on it appropriately, new Justices get appointed in a month (or else), new Court orders a review of every case the six fascists ruled on.

          Oh, what do you know, first out the door, no, extrajudicial murder powers aren’t supported by the Constitution!

          Whoopsie.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        93 months ago

        I mean he would certainly make a mark as one of the most interesting president’s yet by doing so…

    • @Akuden
      link
      -1523 months ago

      deleted by creator

      • @Nightwingdragon
        link
        English
        117
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Who says he can’t? The Supreme Court just said that he’s immune from “official acts” without even defining what that would mean. Who determines what is and isn’t an official act? The President? The Supreme Court? Right now, as this ruling is worded, all bets are off. There’s nothing stopping a sitting President from just arbitrarily declaring someone as a threat to national security and having them picked off by ST6 as an “official act to prevent a terrorist attack against the United States”, then just having the details classified.

        Having something criminal declared as an “official act” is piss-easy, especially when you’re in charge of the branch making the decision and you have one of the other branches in your back pocket, possibly both.

        • @UnpopularCrow
          link
          483 months ago

          Don’t bother with this “user”. Look at their comment history. The person showed up today to defend this obvious act against democracy. My guess is a Russian/Chinese misinformation promoter.

          • @Akuden
            link
            -833 months ago

            deleted by creator

            • Lightor
              link
              243 months ago

              You’re trying to play it off like a joke, but that should really trigger some introspection.

            • GladiusB
              link
              143 months ago

              Good. Fuck off then.

            • @TrickDacy
              link
              103 months ago

              Probably is a total coincidence that you’re saying this here.

        • @Akuden
          link
          -783 months ago

          deleted by creator

          • @Sonicdemon86
            link
            English
            443 months ago

            The laws about that were just thrown out the window with this ruling. Everything is an official act as long as he was president when he stated it to he done. Ordering fries from McDonald’s is now an official act as well.

            • @Akuden
              link
              -75
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              deleted by creator

              • Lightor
                link
                26
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                You just showed us you didn’t lol

          • @Buffalox
            link
            253 months ago

            If it were, Trump would have been behind bars years ago.

      • @blazera
        link
        English
        603 months ago

        Trumps own legal team has described political assassinations as qualifying as an official act as president

        • @Akuden
          link
          -533 months ago

          deleted by creator

          • @blazera
            link
            English
            513 months ago

            It is! in the dissenting opinion in which Sotomayor explicitly describes this ruling as granting immunity for political assassinations

      • @PM_Your_Nudes_Please
        link
        523 months ago

        Shoutout to Voyager for implementing Apollo’s new account marker. It makes spotting trolls really easy.

        • @Akuden
          link
          -243 months ago

          deleted by creator

          • @potpotato
            link
            143 months ago

            “Congress may not criminalize the president’s conduct in carrying out the responsibilities of the executive branch under the Constitution” makes pretty much anything fair fucking game.

            • @Akuden
              link
              -213 months ago

              “The president enjoys no immunity for his unofficial acts, and not everything the President does is official. The President is not above the law,”

              I don’t understand how you can confuse this sentence. People act like the president can commit any crime they want. That is categorically false. Crimes committed in the name in the highest office of the land are not o in an official capacity.

              The U.S. Constitution includes several provisions that limit the powers of the president and prevent the president from committing crimes without consequences:

              Article I, Section 2 and Section 3: These sections provide the House of Representatives the power to impeach the president and the Senate the power to try and convict the president. Impeachment is a process by which the president can be removed from office for committing “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” Article II, Section 4: This section specifically states that the president, vice president, and all civil officers of the United States can be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.

              Article II, Section 1, Clause 8: The president must take an oath of office to “faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” This oath implies a legal and ethical obligation to adhere to the law and Constitution.

              Checks and Balances: The Constitution establishes a system of checks and balances, whereby the legislative and judicial branches can limit the actions of the executive branch. Congress can pass laws, override presidential vetoes, and control the budget, while the judiciary can review the constitutionality of presidential actions through judicial review.

              Together, these provisions and principles ensure that the president is subject to the rule of law and can be held accountable for criminal actions.

              • @potpotato
                link
                213 months ago

                Nothing you wrote ensures anything.

                Trump was impeached twice with no consequence.

                “Official acts” is arbitrary.

                • @Akuden
                  link
                  -203 months ago

                  deleted by creator

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    93 months ago

                    The problem here is that Trump stole and likely sold classified documents. This ruling now allows him to sell secrets that can cause grave danger to the country without consequence.

              • @beebarfbadger
                link
                23 months ago

                So in other words, Trump can do whatever he wants as long as his cronies vote that it’s okay.

      • Butt Pirate
        link
        fedilink
        52
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        There’s some hyperbole in these threads for sure, but not a lot. The president can’t handwave away the bill of rights, because nothing in the constitution gives them that power.

        However, the president does have the authority as commander in chief of authorizing lethal force against individuals. If Biden authorized Seal Team 6 to execute Trump, that is in fact an official act that he has the authority to perform. Sure maybe it is technically not legal, but that doesn’t matter since the president has complete immunity from criminal law. The house could still draft articles of impeachment but the senate would be unable to remove the president because the president is immune to criminal proceedings.

        And if Trump wants to create an organization to round up and execute all the gays (and the Jews, of course), he has the power to do that; and with today’s ruling, he will never face consequences for doing so.

        Irreparable damage has been done to American democracy today.

        • @bashbeerbash
          link
          63 months ago

          The Christian Caliphate was birthed today, and Trump will be supreme Ayatollah

        • @Akuden
          link
          -66
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          deleted by creator

          • Tiefling IRL
            link
            fedilink
            413 months ago

            At this point you need to present your evidence that they can’t because SCROTUS literally said they can

            • @Akuden
              link
              -193 months ago

              At this point you’ve outed yourself as a partisan hack that is stuck in binary thinking.

              • @Hackworth
                link
                English
                133 months ago

                At this point, you’re a towel.

          • @WhatYouNeed
            link
            233 months ago

            But as an official act, the president can strip someone of citizenship.

            • @Akuden
              link
              -93 months ago

              Removed by mod

              • @jordanlund
                shield
                M
                link
                33 months ago

                Removed, civility, ableist slur.

          • Butt Pirate
            link
            fedilink
            13
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            The supreme court Supreme Court Justices disagree with you, but OK I’ll bite.

            Why can’t a president kill an american citizen on american soil? Because it’s illegal? Do you understand that that that no longer applies to the president?

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            33 months ago

            So you are saying he just has to wait until he leaves American soil? You’re right, that’s so inconvenient.

      • @Riccosuave
        link
        423 months ago

        The president can’t commit criminal acts and claim it was an official capacity, lol.

        What the fuck do you mean “lol”. That is PRECISELY what this ruling does. It removes criminal liability for anything that is done as an official act, which is entirely fucking subjective, and up to the interpretation of a corrupt, coopted judiciary. Get the fuck out of here with that bullshit.

        • @Akuden
          link
          -60
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          deleted by creator

          • @Riccosuave
            link
            233 months ago

            The stupidity of this statement truly strains belief given the actual verbiage in this ruling. May you suffer the full weight and consequences of that stupidity.

          • Jackie's Fridge
            link
            153 months ago

            And who decides how to interpret law and levy consequence? And whose pocket are they in?

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            43 months ago

            A person of power cannot commit a crime and claim it was in official capacity, because the act itself is against the law and cannot be committed without consequence.

            This whole ruling is because of a person in power (Trump) who committed a crime (fake electors plot to overturn the 2020 election) and is claiming it as an official capacity of the office. That’s the whole point of the case which was appealed to the Supreme Court.

            So what consequence will Trump face for his crimes now based on this ruling?

            • @Akuden
              link
              -63 months ago

              deleted by creator

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        303 months ago

        You can organize a coup to overthrow the government and claim it’s an official act, there’s absolutely nothing stopping a president from claiming assassinations are an official act now. Hell, the commander in chief already organizes assassinations on foreign targets.

        The Democrats might not abuse this, but the Republicans will, and they have given themselves carte blanche to start killing political dissidents.

        • @TokenBoomer
          link
          73 months ago

          Is this fascism yet, or are we waiting for the trains to run on time?

          • @pivot_root
            link
            33 months ago

            I think we all know that one of those two things will never happen in the land of the free and home of the mass-produced automobile.

        • @Akuden
          link
          -443 months ago

          deleted by creator

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            273 months ago

            Your logic doesn’t even follow. Why would the president need immunity for a non-criminal act? Think about it for like 2 seconds dude.

            • @Akuden
              link
              -383 months ago

              deleted by creator

      • @Rakonat
        link
        English
        193 months ago

        Supreme court literally just said he could by saying Jan 6 was fine for President to incite

      • @Malek061
        link
        113 months ago

        Al-Aulaqi v. Obama made kill lists for Americans legal.

      • @Buffalox
        link
        9
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        If they are traitors and terrorists, he may have to send them to Guantanamo.

        • @Akuden
          link
          -293 months ago

          deleted by creator

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        43 months ago

        While i agree with you, it’s a huge grey area. Like Biden could have trump assassinated and then claim that his constitutional duties require him to protect the cotus from enemies both foreign and domestic.

        Official act or not?

        • @Akuden
          link
          -113 months ago

          deleted by creator

            • @Mirshe
              link
              83 months ago

              In fact, it would have to be the DoJ or Congress that did so - Biden could order the DoJ to stop, and arguably could have anyone in Congress killed or jailed without trial by stating that they presented a clear danger to democracy by trying to impeach him.