Jump to content

'stache

Certifiably Surly
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    14101

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

 Content Type 

Everything posted by 'stache

  1. 'stache

    The Supremes

    'stache replied to tx 3 putt's topic in Cloak Room

    You realize that the voters are very different, right? Trump says he’ll jail lawmakers he doesn’t like, republican voters say great, what strength. Biden says he’ll pack the court, dem voters will cry dictator. It’s the massive downside of the left that most (or at least half) of their traditional voters actually give a fuck. The other side are sheep who just nod along with literally anything their dear leaders say. How do you propose convincing those people to do the same? I personally hate the idea of court packing but you have to dig pretty deep into what has happened the last 8 years and I now support it for those reasons. Tons of people don’t pay that close of attention and will be turned off by that proposal, the same people who probably haven’t heard trumps proposals or don’t think they’re as serious as they truly are at this point.
  2. 'stache
    Now do trump. Oh wait, they’re all behind him, only dems undermine their own candidate at every turn. “Biden’s Post Debate Appearances Raise Suspicions of Drug Use” Byline: “Strong Competent Speeches Likely Explained By Cocaine” Welcome to America.
  3. 'stache
    Well of course. At least he didn’t strangle his pregnant girlfriend?
  4. 'stache
    None of the former teams are on that page, but are still in the record books.
  5. 'stache

    The Supremes

    'stache replied to tx 3 putt's topic in Cloak Room

    Yes they can absolutely refuse. Immunity from criminal prosecution doesn’t make an illegal order legal. The fact that the president can’t be prosecuted after the fact is absolute bullshit from a rogue court but it doesn’t make it a legal order. If the military acts on illegal orders to shoot and kill on US soil, or even to block polling places, were fucked anyway, full blown banana republic, the courts wouldn’t have a say anyway.
  6. 'stache

    The Supremes

    'stache replied to tx 3 putt's topic in Cloak Room

    Yours damn right they should refuse, like AG Barr refusing to execute on Trumps plan to overturn the election. Biden only took office because the republican SOS in Georgia and Arizona refused to do what he asked. It’s been said before, democracy requires people in power to act with a little bit of good faith, that’s the true threat. If the military agrees to execute upon illegal orders (say block polling stations in Philadelphia and Detroit and shoot people who try to vote) we’re fucked anyway. It’s literal banana republic shit. As has been said, every accusation is a confession with these assholes.
  7. 'stache

    The Supremes

    'stache replied to tx 3 putt's topic in Cloak Room

    That’s the right question, having nothing to do with criminal immunity. If the military had backed Trump in 2020 there would have been no transition of power.
  8. 'stache

    The Supremes

    'stache replied to tx 3 putt's topic in Cloak Room

    The first sentence is absolutely true, but the rest is not. The courts can still restrain a president from enacting decisions that are outside the executive function. The courts said Biden's student loan forgiveness program was outside of executive powers. That was not a criminal prosecution and immunity plays no role in that analysis whatsoever. How can anyone possibly believe that today's decision could benefit Biden in any way whatsoever? If trump wins and has Biden prosecuted for his border policy, SCOTUS will just say it wasn't an official act, because reasons. That's the problem, SCOTUS has abdicated it's role as a check on executive power and has become a rubberstamp for magastan.
  9. 'stache

    The Supremes

    'stache replied to tx 3 putt's topic in Cloak Room

    Sure, but immunity from criminal prosecution would have nothing to do with it, that's my only point.
  10. 'stache

    The Supremes

    'stache replied to tx 3 putt's topic in Cloak Room

    WTF are you talking about? Of course I see it, this SCOTUS is rogue as fuck. I honestly don't even know what you're talking about anymore. Surely, you agree that Biden can't just do whatever he wants and get away with it because of immunity from criminal prosecutions, right? This SCOTUS would strike it all down, because criminal immunity has nothing to do with judicial checks on executive powers and decision making. They'll reverse Biden at every turn, and rubber stamp Trump. Again, it has nothing to do with criminal immunity. If Biden is charged with a crime later, the decision won't protect him either, because this SCOTUS is nothing more than another political branch. They'll just say whatever he did wasn't "official", ergo, no immunity.
  11. 'stache

    The Supremes

    'stache replied to tx 3 putt's topic in Cloak Room

    And if he gets away with it, it'll have nothing to do with immunity from criminal prosecution, because he'd never be charged with any crimes. It'd be a complete breakdown of constitutional checks and balances, which is the real threat we're facing. An entire political party is not only enabling this, but promoting it. In this scenario, who would be criminally prosecuting Trump? Nobody, criminal immunity would therefore be irrelevant. Also, I was addressing the people saying that Biden should do this, or Biden should do that. Surely you agree that this SCOTUS under its ruling today would never use it to benefit Biden in any way, right? That's the whole fucking point of this SCOTUS being fucking rogue as fuck.
  12. 'stache

    The Supremes

    'stache replied to tx 3 putt's topic in Cloak Room

    You're talking about something that has nothing to do with today's SCOTUS immunity decision. When you say "the case gets all the way to the new SCOTUS" you would have to be talking about a criminal prosecution, and what you're talking about would not result in a criminal prosecution in the first place, so immunity has nothing to do with it. In fact, the dictatorship you're referring to would pretty much take the judiciary out of everything, especially any concept of criminal prosecutions against the dictator, that's how dictatorships work. See Netanyahu's recent actions limiting the authority of the judiciary in the first place.
  13. 'stache

    The Supremes

    'stache replied to tx 3 putt's topic in Cloak Room

    I'm not saying it's not as bad as it seems, I'm saying that Biden can't just start making governmental decisions under the guise of immunity. SCOTUS would still undo anything that is outside the executive power, and yeah, if he's charged with a crime, they'd probably call it not an official act, because Biden, so the decision protects only Donald Trump, period.
  14. 'stache

    The Supremes

    'stache replied to tx 3 putt's topic in Cloak Room

    Do you seriously not understand the context of immunity from criminal prosecution vs. executive decision making in general? If your skepticism is that the court is bias and illegitimate, it just underscores that anything Biden does that is arguably outside of the executive function will definitely be reversed by SCOTUS (like student loan forgiveness) even if he's immune from criminal prosecution (which of course this SCOTUS would find that it doesn't apply to Biden, because reasons).
  15. 'stache

    The Supremes

    'stache replied to tx 3 putt's topic in Cloak Room

    I obviously don't like this clearly political decision from SCOTUS, but I think people have it really wrong saying he can do this or do that without repercussion. The immunity is from criminal prosecution. The courts can still reverse any actions the president takes that is not authorized. If he has justices or lawmakers arrested and imprisoned, those people can still petition the courts that the act was outside of executive authority, and they'd be right. The courts can then reverse the decision (like they did Biden's loan forgiveness program which SCOTUS held was not within executive powers). The immunity would only prevent criminal prosecution against the president for kidnapping or whatever the criminal equivalent is of false imprisonment.
  16. 'stache
    He's still alive? God damnit. I made this rule a while back, auto neg for citing Swaim. Sorry, gotta be consistent.
  17. 'stache
    And after the starter throws an interception early in the game. Massive overreactions still ongoing I see.
  18. 'stache

    The Supremes

    'stache replied to tx 3 putt's topic in Cloak Room

    JFC, you're the reason the Chief Justice and the traitor Alito are on the court you dumb mother fucker.
  19. 'stache
    Just looked at Klay's numbers last year and they were still pretty good. The price looks to be good. I think it's a good signing with a lot of upside and not much downside.
  20. 'stache
    When was the last time Head Coach in Waiting worked out? I only seem to recall several failures (Sean Sutton and Pat Knight come immediately to mind).
  21. 'stache
    Do they have the same reaction to Trump babbling a bunch of lies and nonsense? The right supports and emboldens him through everything. The left is now undermining their own guy despite his actual words and accomplishments. Replacing him now is just a sign of surrender. He looked fine the next morning on the campaign trail. Why no mention of that? Because we pretend that debates are something special, they aren't anymore.
  22. 'stache
    Nobody is immune, sec bigger than everything.
  23. 'stache

    The Supremes

    'stache replied to tx 3 putt's topic in Cloak Room

    A part of the majority I read seemed to say that Trump's talks with his own AG are immune because that's part of the job, but that his pressuring state actors in Arizona and Georgia were not official, because he has no authority to direct state procedures. On its face, the syllabus of the majority opinion does not feel too out of left field (other than the evidentiary rule that I discussed above), but Sotomayor is fired the fuck up and is in a very rare tone. She concludes "With fear for our democracy, I dissent." That's pretty fucking powerful. It could be primarily about the evidentiary rule that is still confounding me at this point, but I think its far deeper to elicit that type of comment.
  24. 'stache
    JFC, if Michelle Obama wanted to hold office she would have run by now. Why do people keep bringing up her name?
  25. 'stache

    The Supremes

    'stache replied to tx 3 putt's topic in Cloak Room

    Kavanaugh, Roberts, and Gorsuch also show normalcy from time to time, but on the whole, they are still rogue and anti-democratic on many, many issues. They also refuse to acknowledge that Alito and Thomas are entirely political animals who refuse to do their jobs objectively. Fuck them.

Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...