The Supremes

[Red Five 40,846]

What’s with all of the hypotheticals that have nothing to do with the case in front of them? Considering the urgency here, or what should be urgency I guess, why not say something like “We can address all of these hypotheticals at a later date, but for now, no, a President does not have immunity for failed coup attempts.”

[HenryJames 66,038]

4 minutes ago, Red Five said:

What’s with all of the hypotheticals that have nothing to do with the case in front of them? Considering the urgency here, or what should be urgency I guess, why not say something like “We can address all of these hypotheticals at a later date, but for now, no, a President does not have immunity for failed coup attempts.”

Because they're going to kick it back to the lower courts to sort out which will push the trial past the election. Just honest brokers. 

[chainsaw 9,858]

Here's something to add to the pile of hypotheticals: what happens if a President renounces their citizenship during his term? Are they still President?

[Js1 85,288]

11 minutes ago, Red Five said:

What’s with all of the hypotheticals that have nothing to do with the case in front of them?

Well it's not like SCOTUS lately has dealt in facts. 

[Captainant 27,638]

34 minutes ago, Red Five said:

What’s with all of the hypotheticals that have nothing to do with the case in front of them? Considering the urgency here, or what should be urgency I guess, why not say something like “We can address all of these hypotheticals at a later date, but for now, no, a President does not have immunity for failed coup attempts.”

My guy, the supremes have issued entire rulings constructed whole-cloth out of hypotheticals that have nothing do with the case in front of them.

 

It's what fascists do when they don't have facts on their side: stoke grievances with hypotheticals. See: DT pro-Palestine protest thread

[Mdhorn 5,947]

Biden should perp walk several SCOTUS members to some very public gallows set up on the National Mall, and on the way, repeatedly loudly ask the justices at what point do they understand why a president shouldn't have absolute immunity.  It's like they rely on Democrats being decent, whereas they and who they represent are not.  If you're taking a billionaire's money, you're not representing the average citizen. 

[Red Five 40,846]

Let’s just take our sweet ass time while the guy on trial for overturning an election runs for President again. No urgency needed there at all.

At what point to the liberal members of the court start speaking out publicly?

[wildcat09 29,347]

1 minute ago, Red Five said:

At what point to the liberal members of the court start speaking out publicly?

Never.

[Gatorubet 30,185]

2 minutes ago, Red Five said:

At what point to the liberal members of the court start speaking out publicly?

I believe they call it a dissent?

[Nivek 16,923]

If all men are created equally and the president has immunity from all crimes, then so do I.

[Gatorubet 30,185]

3 hours ago, yoladu said:

it's incredulous to me that a white man who sits on the US Supreme Court would feel that he has somehow been wronged in any possible way. He has the fucking brass ring.

Justice Thomas is weird that way. 

[henrygandorf 29,189]

45 minutes ago, Nivek said:

If all men are created equally and the president has immunity from all crimes, then so do I.

you do.  the purge is in the constitution.

[wildcat09 29,347]

43 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

you do.  the purge is in the constitution.

[Satchel 6,934]

Why aren’t the media in an uproar about Clarence sitting up there asking questions when his wife remains at large?

[henrygandorf 29,189]

extra large, more like.

[Js1 85,288]

1 hour ago, wildcat09 said:

Yes I endorse the catapult method for Trump. Send his fat ass to Siberia via catapult 

[Bullneck 19,073]

[pacman 7,355]

As if Trumps tiny hands can hold a gun...

[Bullneck 19,073]

 

 

[Red Five 40,846]

I seriously can't believe we had a three hour session in front of the Supreme Court, where the argument was "We think a President should be able to commit as many crimes as he likes". And they were like "Hmm, interesting. We will need more time to discuss the pros and cons of this."

I also can't believe that one of the justice's wives actually participated in the events that took place in this case, and that justice didn't recuse himself. 

[Mdhorn 5,947]

22 hours ago, Js1 said:

Yes I endorse the catapult method for Trump. Send his fat ass to Siberia via catapult 

Gonna need a bigger catapult.

[pacman 7,355]

Having some random person clear hundreds of thousands of your debt tends to change perspectives 

[YGIFS 19,449]

1 hour ago, Bullneck said:

 

 

I don't know this boy band, but they seem like they suck.  Although I bet the backup dancers perform well.  Or else, they die.  

Edited April 27 by YGIFS

[pacman 7,355]

[Francisco 2.0 32,389]

On 4/27/2024 at 3:18 PM, pacman said:

Having some random person clear hundreds of thousands of your debt tends to change perspectives 

 

Well, you see.  And this is an important distinction here.

It was 2009, and there was this certain person who was President.

 

[pacman 7,355]

"Hotly contested" - Biden smoked Trump by 74 electoral votes. Hundreds of losing and tossed out court cases don't make anything hotly contested. It just shows a very poor loser.

"Bitter" - why would the winning candidate be bitter?

[Captainant 27,638]

14 minutes ago, pacman said:

"Hotly contested" - Biden smoked Trump by 74 electoral votes. Hundreds of losing and tossed out court cases don't make anything hotly contested. It just shows a very poor loser.

"Bitter" - why would the winning candidate be bitter?

It's projection, because he would feel vindictive in that position. 

[Js1 85,288]

“Who knows it’s a very real possibility” implied that the incumbent who lost knows he did illegal things in office 

[Red Five 40,846]

And once again, none of this was a problem before we elected the carnival barking conman. 

[Chuckie Finster 22,694]

8 minutes ago, Red Five said:

And once again, none of this was a problem before we elected the carnival barking conman. 

That's what is so infuriating.  We have 240+ years of evidence that the current system is fine and these chucklefucks are acting like Trump is the first person in history to face a life after the presidency.  

(I fully realize they don't believe any of this and are purely trying to play Calvinball to benefit their team, the frustration is that we can do nothing about it.)

['stache 21,797]

On 4/27/2024 at 3:18 PM, pacman said:

Having some random person clear hundreds of thousands of your debt tends to change perspectives 

That’s fully consistent with one of their talking points, that a president can only be criminally prosecuted after being impeached and removed. The reality is that the process is now just partisan votes, the evidence was irrelevant.

[Dnaguy 11,920]

1 hour ago, pacman said:

"Hotly contested" - Biden smoked Trump by 74 electoral votes. Hundreds of losing and tossed out court cases don't make anything hotly contested. It just shows a very poor loser.

"Bitter" - why would the winning candidate be bitter?

 

Monarchical president 'democracy' >>>>>>> rule of law democracy where a political party pays a price for a criminal President

 

Gotcha.

[jimmyjazz 45,891]

32 minutes ago, 'stache said:

That’s fully consistent with one of their talking points, that a president can only be criminally prosecuted after being impeached and removed. The reality is that the process is now just partisan votes, the evidence was irrelevant.

One of my favorites of all their hits.

Impeachment is a political process.  Prosecution is a legal process.  Claiming that one must precede the other is pure horseshit.

[Red Five 40,846]

2 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

One of my favorites of all their hits.

Impeachment is a political process.  Prosecution is a legal process.  Claiming that one must precede the other is pure horseshit.

Dotard's attorney arguing before the Supreme Court, "No no, the president must be impeached and convicted first, prior to being charged criminally."

Anyone say "Oh yeah? Where'd you get that from? I don't see that written down anywhere...."

[Dnaguy 11,920]

I know it’s not how they operate but I really wish that the solicitor general would have used names instead of the position.

i think it would have been pretty awesome to hear the hypothetical of ‘Joe Biden ordering the killing of Justice Alito, Thomas, and Barrett’ to so to secure a democratically appointed majority on the Supreme Court. 

I would love to hear Alito’s musings and straw man Fox Newsisms then.

[Js1 85,288]

16 minutes ago, Dnaguy said:

I know it’s not how they operate but I really wish that the solicitor general would have used names instead of the position.

i think it would have been pretty awesome to hear the hypothetical of ‘Joe Biden ordering the killing of Justice Alito, Thomas, and Barrett’ to so to secure a democratically appointed majority on the Supreme Court. 

I would love to hear Alito’s musings and straw man Fox Newsisms then.

Fox News: wow we have to increase funding and protection after Biden threatened SCOTUS justices via his SG. He’s completely gone full blown dictator 

[Nivek 16,923]

4 hours ago, Red Five said:

And once again, none of this was a problem before we elected the carnival barking conman. 

Um, it was a problem when we started putting hacks and morons on the supreme court and pretending they were anything but.  Citizens United was a moronic decision.  

[Fudge Nuggets 19,189]

But I was told many times that Roberts cares so much about the perception of the court.

[Fudge Nuggets 19,189]

You know these assholes are pulling some grade-A bullshit when even Twice isn't in here with the old "well actually..." line.

[YGIFS 19,449]

If only there were 10 examples of incumbents who legitimately lost re-election bids and didn't fail miserably in dozens of court cases to overturn it.  Hmmmmmm.   

"You know, as a student of history..." 

[WhatTheBuck 28,775]

17 hours ago, Nivek said:

Um, it was a problem when we started putting hacks and morons on the supreme court and pretending they were anything but.  Citizens United was a moronic decision.  

And blatant judicial activism. 

[Bozo_Casanova 26,437]

29 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

And blatant judicial activism. 

Leegin should have made that clear to everyone, but a bunch of lawyers here who have since had conversions on this road told me at that time I didn't understand how negotiations work. 

[Nivek 16,923]

On 4/30/2024 at 7:28 AM, Bozo_Casanova said:

Leegin should have made that clear to everyone, but a bunch of lawyers here who have since had conversions on this road told me at that time I didn't understand how negotiations work. 

You are also too stupid to understand the law, so just leave the thinking to the great minds of Thomas, Taney (of Dredd Scott decision fame), etc. so shut the fuck up and do what you are told.   /Roberts.  

[HenryJames 66,038]

https://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/S267522.PDF

 

[tx 3 putt 76,873]

 

[Bookman 4,638]

On 5/2/2024 at 8:11 PM, HenryJames said:

https://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/S267522.PDF

 

The entire concurring opinion should be read.

[HenryJames 66,038]

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/trump-gun-owners-jan-6-rioters-tough-crime-justice-alito-displays-empa-rcna151242
 

Trump, gun owners and Jan. 6 rioters: Tough-on-crime Justice Alito displays empathy for some criminal defendants

In recent Supreme Court arguments, the former prosecutor has asked skeptical questions about criminal cases against former President Donald Trump, Jan. 6 defendants and gun owners.

[Horn Under a Bad Sign 20,392]

Clarence Thomas benefactor Harlan Crow misrepresented his yacht as a business in order to take millions in tax deductions  in a "run of the mill" tax scam. Glad to know that there's at least a senate probe into this:

https://www.propublica.org/article/senate-probe-casts-doubt-harlan-crow-yacht-tax-deductions



 

[DigglerontheHoof 21,183]

15 minutes ago, Horn Under a Bad Sign said:

Clarence Thomas benefactor Harlan Crow misrepresented his yacht as a business in order to take millions in tax deductions  in a "run of the mill" tax scam. Glad to know that there's at least a senate probe into this:

https://www.propublica.org/article/senate-probe-casts-doubt-harlan-crow-yacht-tax-deductions



 

I'm sure he'll pay dearly for it.  🙄

[Chad Fuck 17,659]

This is an interesting read:

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2024/05/supreme-court-justice-second-amendment-originalism-fake-history.html

Quote

A State Supreme Court Justice Decries the “Horrors and Treachery” Coming From SCOTUS