4 ms·
Folks, the blueprint for a American dictatorship has been created and you'll be a fool and a idiot to think otherwise.
by leotravis10 2y ago
Folks, the blueprint for a American dictatorship has been created and you'll be a fool and a idiot to think otherwise.
- danielmarkbruce 2y ago[flagged]
- leotravis10 2y agoI'm leaving this here for you to read: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40848935 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40848935
- danielmarkbruce 2y agoAwesome. Media coverage. The actual ruling: https://prod-i.a.dj.com/public/resources/documents/SCOTUSTRUMPDC.pdf https://prod-i.a.dj.com/public/resources/documents/SCOTUSTRU... We are in an age where the media cannot be trusted. Gotta read the source documents.
- koonsolo 2y agoIf Trump gets elected, he will never give away his power easily.
- citizen_friend 2y ago[flagged]
- leotravis10 2y agoRead this and get back to me: https://www.vox.com/scotus/358292/supreme-court-trump-immunity-dictatorship https://www.vox.com/scotus/358292/supreme-court-trump-immuni...
- citizen_friend 2y ago[flagged]
- vlovich123 2y agoThe scenario you describe has never been the case and is already settled law. The president has largely been already held to be immune from litigation for their official acts while president. In fact, it was a huge debate because Clinton got sued civilly by Republican activists for various reasons and SCOTUS held that the trial could proceed while he was president. So in fact, the only time a president has been sued and had to participate while President was when the Republicans tried to jam up a Democratic one, in the middle of a war (Kosovo although some will claim that Clinton “started” that war precisely because of the lawsuit). What’s specifically new here is the claim by SCOTUS that the President also has post-presidency immunity. It used to be you could use it as a defense whereby you provide evidence that you weren’t acting corruptly within your official acts. Now it’s a blanket immunity - a trial can’t even be brought and your motivations are largely irrelevant and immune from examination.
- citizen_friend 2y ago[flagged]
- vlovich123 2y agoUS v Nixon very clearly put limits of what the president could do in office. Under this ruling, Nixon could have kept the tapes of him ordering the Watergate break in a secret and would have remained in office. > While the Court acknowledged that the principle of executive privilege did exist, the Court would also directly reject President Nixon's claim to an "absolute, unqualified Presidential privilege of immunity from judicial process under all circumstances." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Nixon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Nixon This ruling directly contradicts and overturns US v Nixon which is a blaring signal considering just how criminally we now know Nixon, his administration, and his reelection committee was behaving.
- vundercind 2y agoWe had an attempted coup already. That this case was directly related to. I don’t even mean the very public storming of Congress during the certification of electors, but multiple attempts by the then-President to subvert the election process. The guy who did it’s probably about to be President again and just got a lot more legal cover. Folks need to read up on how democracies fail. Shit’s getting real iffy here.
- citizen_friend 2y agoAnd yet he left office on the appointed day and lost an election. > democracies fail Is this the democracy where we need to stop voters from voting or give them incomplete information to avoid making bad choices?
- MOARDONGZPLZ 2y ago> And yet he left office on the appointed day and lost an election. Very narrowly, and not but for the uncharacteristic acts of a small number of others like Mike Pence. It could have gone very differently very easily.
- remus 2y ago> And yet he left office on the appointed day and lost an election. Trump would argue he didn't lose the election, and would still be in power if he had his way. I think we should be making it harder, not easier, for the democratic process to be subverted.
- vundercind 2y agoYes. I wrote “attempted”.
- riskable 2y ago> And yet he left office on the appointed day and lost an election. Only because his coup failed. That's a very important fact.
- citizen_friend 2y ago
- ChildOfEru 2y agoIt has been 3 years and 6 months since Trumps election interference with essentially no progress being made in the courts. If and when Trump gets elected how long do you think it will take the Supreme Court to differentiate between an 'official' act and a 'non-official' act when Trump acts illegally in 2025? Throw in the recent ruling increasing the difficulty of proving bribery and things are looking grim ( IMHO ).
- citizen_friend 2y agoIf you’re hoping trump is jailed before election, I agree that is unlikely to happen.
- kitsune_ 2y agoMy grandmother fled Nazism (and Stalinism), she would turn in her grave seeing how blind half of your electorate is.
- citizen_friend 2y agoYour grandmother is not the arbiter of politics, and we can find 2 other grandmothers with the opposite view and similar experiences.
- davidw 2y agoYeah, we've been hearing the "alarmist" thing for 8 years now. "Roe is settled law, stop being hysterical".
- bsimpson 2y agoPart of this is abdication and dysfunction of the government overall. As I remember it, the argument was that Roe was based on faulty caselaw. If so, I have no problem with it being overruled, but I then expect Congress to pass the correct law to take its place. The problem isn't that Roe was overturned - it's that our legislative system is so dysfunctional that law is being settled in the other branches of government.
- davidw 2y agoThe ruling was based on what we call "calvinball", where they just make shit up that suits their own views.
- citizen_friend 2y agoIf that’s your level of argumentative empathy I can see why you’re mad.
- davidw 2y agoI'm mad because authoritarianism and its supporters are bad, full stop.
- fny 2y agoFolks, the blueprint for prosecuting Trump has been created. If you read the complete ruling, the justices work to clarify how "official" and "unofficial" acts apply to the case at hand. For example, many of the conversations had with Pence and the AG are considered off limits for prosecution as they are "official." Other charges, however, can stick if the lower court decides: > Trump can point to no plausible source of authority enabling the President to not only organize alternate slates of electors but also cause those electors—unapproved by any state official—to transmit votes to the President of the Senate for counting at the certification proceeding, thus interfering with the votes of States’ properly appointed electors The damning part starts on page 27 of the ruling[0]. [0]: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-939_e2pg.pdf https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-939_e2pg.pdf
- nickburns 2y agowhat a dramatic take. surely you haven't read the actual opinion. for posterity, this is "the blueprint for a [sic] American dictatorship" to which you refer: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-939_e2pg.pdf https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-939_e2pg.pdf
- leotravis10 2y agoI'm just going to leave this here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40848935 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40848935
- nickburns 2y agoi'm a little busy cutting through the actual opinion at the moment. maaaybe i'll get to this Vox journalist's own interpretation of it when i'm done. no breath should be held though.
- leotravis10 2y agoJust to let you know that he (like the rest of us) have already read it.
- nickburns 2y ago> Just to let you know that he (like the rest of us) have already read it. exceedingly doubtful.
- leotravis10 2y ago> exceedingly doubtful. I hope you read Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s very important dissent while you're at it.
- danielmarkbruce 2y agoNobody who actually read the ruling would link to a media take on it, or make a silly comment like this. The dissent is part of the package, published together. THere is the majoriy opinion, often a dissenting opinion, and sometimes (like here) even more. Some people actually have a clue what's going on. It takes work, you can't just lazily consume nonsense from journalists.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]