Octopus Overlords

Kraken wrote: Wed Apr 24, 2024 9:52 pm It looks like SCOTUS is going to slow-walk the spurious immunity decision long enough to ensure that the most important case can't go forward before the election.

Kurth wrote: Thu Apr 25, 2024 11:20 am That’s not what I’m hearing. These arguments have me concerned.

Kurth wrote: Thu Apr 25, 2024 11:20 am That’s not what I’m hearing. These arguments have me concerned.

Smoove_B wrote: Thu Apr 25, 2024 11:26 am

Kurth wrote: Thu Apr 25, 2024 11:20 am That’s not what I’m hearing. These arguments have me concerned.

The crux of the argument is that it's up to Congress to decide - they must impeach based on conduct, right? Specifically, if Congress doesn't or won't impeach, it's not up to the courts to decide guilt or innocence.

Kurth wrote: Thu Apr 25, 2024 12:42 pm And they’re done. Case is submitted. No rebuttal from Trump, which was interesting.

Dogstar wrote: Thu Apr 25, 2024 1:05 pm This was more of a mixed-bag than I was expecting (I was expecting 7-2 because we don't have kings here). There was concern about prosecutorial overreach, which was noted above, which doesn't seem to be a concern elsewhere, as the rest of us can't seem to do much about that if we encounter that problem (as prosecutors currently have immunity and their decisions have limited review). There was concern about distinguishing between an official and a private act. There was Alito's staggering assertion that immunity is an incentive for presidents to leave office peacefully. There was Trump's lawyer's assertion that coups and assassinations could possibly be official acts -- and I'm not sure how you'd prosecute that either, as other have noted, because if you round up all the people that might impeach you, you've solved that problem for yourself.

There are anywhere from 3-5 votes for some type of immunity judging from the oral arguments. That feels insane, and I hope that I'm wrong. Trying to kick it to Congress to determine what's an official act, given how non-functional Congress is, feels like dereliction of duty, even if I can understand the Court stating that it's not its job to do so.

Absent a swift 9-0, 8-1, or 7-2 decision against presidential immunity, this is going to further erode public trust in the Supreme Court as a non-political unbiased institution. And if there is Presidential immunity? I just don't know.

SCOTUS: The president does not have the power to forgive student loans under this particular law.

TRUMP: OK, but he could order someone killed, though, right?

Holman wrote: Thu Apr 25, 2024 6:40 pm Holy shit.

I just learned that Clarence Thomas, in casting doubt on whether a President should be prosecuted for attempting a domestic coup, asked whether JFK should have been prosecuted for supporting a coup against Fidel Castro.

Slam dunk, Clarence!

waitingtoconnect wrote: Thu Apr 25, 2024 7:16 pm And what do you do as a Supreme Court justice if your wife was connected with said coup in some way?

waitingtoconnect wrote: Thu Apr 25, 2024 7:16 pm I really think we are headed to a 1824 election.

Smoove_B wrote: Fri Apr 26, 2024 10:19 am I think you keep forgetting that we have collectively learned that there's a significant number of Americans that would be perfectly happy under the rule of a King - as long as he is *their* King.

Smoove_B wrote: Fri Apr 26, 2024 10:19 am I think you keep forgetting that we have collectively learned that there's a significant number of Americans that would be perfectly happy under the rule of a King - as long as he is *their* King.

Holman wrote: Tue Apr 30, 2024 7:02 pm

Smoove_B wrote: Fri Apr 26, 2024 10:19 am I think you keep forgetting that we have collectively learned that there's a significant number of Americans that would be perfectly happy under the rule of a King - as long as he is *their* King.

I spend an unhealthy amount of time paying attention to Christian Nationalism, and I now expect that Monarchy will be their next ambition.

Up to now they have spent a lot of time trying to persuade themselves that the Founding Fathers were enamored of the Old Testament and that they modeled the Constitution on it directly. (Really.) There's literally no plausible foundation for this, either in the Founders' writings or in the Bible, but there are preacher/prophet/pundits building whole careers on the claim, and some of them are deeply involved with TrumpWorld.

The next and much smoother step will be just to insist that democracy itself is un-Biblical and that God's establishment of a theocratic monarchy in Biblical times (King Solomon, King David, etc), supported by an official Priestly class, is the only proper form of government.

Given everything they say about Christian supremacy already, I can think of no reason why they would hold back from this option when it becomes available.

Holman wrote: Tue Apr 30, 2024 7:02 pm

Smoove_B wrote: Fri Apr 26, 2024 10:19 am I think you keep forgetting that we have collectively learned that there's a significant number of Americans that would be perfectly happy under the rule of a King - as long as he is *their* King.

I spend an unhealthy amount of time paying attention to Christian Nationalism, and I now expect that Monarchy will be their next ambition.

Up to now they have spent a lot of time trying to persuade themselves that the Founding Fathers were enamored of the Old Testament and that they modeled the Constitution on it directly. (Really.) There's literally no plausible foundation for this, either in the Founders' writings or in the Bible, but there are preacher/prophet/pundits building whole careers on the claim, and some of them are deeply involved with TrumpWorld.

The next and much smoother step will be just to insist that democracy itself is un-Biblical and that God's establishment of a theocratic monarchy in Biblical times (King Solomon, King David, etc), supported by an official Priestly class, is the only proper form of government.

Given everything they say about Christian supremacy already, I can think of no reason why they would hold back from this option when it becomes available.

gbasden wrote: Tue Apr 30, 2024 10:00 pm My thought that we have a better than average chance at a second Civil War, or at least widespread political violence, hasn't really changed.

LordMortis wrote: Wed May 01, 2024 6:51 am I don't see the 2nd civil war (at this point) but the widespread political violence temperature keeps going up and as much as I hate hate hate to say it but that's part of temp rising... On both sides... No one wants to back down, which is expected, but very few want to talk it through any more (myself included).

LordMortis wrote: Wed May 01, 2024 6:51 am

gbasden wrote: Tue Apr 30, 2024 10:00 pm My thought that we have a better than average chance at a second Civil War, or at least widespread political violence, hasn't really changed.

I don't see the 2nd civil war (at this point) but the widespread political violence temperature keeps going up and as much as I hate hate hate to say it but that's part of temp rising... On both sides... No one wants to back down, which is expected, but very few want to talk it through any more (myself included).

waitingtoconnect wrote: Tue Apr 30, 2024 10:10 pm Perhaps they view Trump as a Saul or David like figure?

In 2016, Jerry Falwell Jr. said that “God called King David a man after God’s own heart even though he was an adulterer and a murderer.”

Of course David was held responsible by God and accepted punishment and guilt for his crimes.