politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
And this came up because...?
Because his lawyer said that he was allowed to do it lol.
And I’m still trying to figure out why that lawyer was arguing that Biden should be allowed to assassinate Trump.
Because his client is claiming absolute immunity. So he has to hold that position even to the utmost absurd hypotheticals. If there is anything at all that isn't covered then the immunity is not absolute, and he's forced to argue degrees about which acts or crimes are covered. At that point the entire argument collapses as the result is quite obviously "at least some acts" and "at least many if not most crimes" are not covered by any sort of immunity. There's nowhere else to run with the argument.
Got himself stuck between a rock and a hard place.
“Should the president be allowed to perform abortions” hah gottem
Once the so-called "Supreme" court rules Biden can issue orders.
They know Biden won't do that.
This would be giving Biden absolute power. It's difficult to predict what any specific person would do in those circumstances.
There's a lot of evidence that Biden hasn't abused power when he's received it in the past, but imagine he's given absolute power, and then Trump wins the election. And then Trump threatens Biden and his entire family.
I don't know what Biden would do in that situation, but I know what I'd do.
I know what I hope Biden would do and what I would do. But I doubt he would do it.
Repubs have been wallowing in the mud for decades now. Dems are still trying to compromise and fantasize that they can work together. Biden would be urging the House to pass a "President is not immune" bill up until the Afternoon of the Long Knives on Jan. 20th, 2025.
I thought they were stalling the cases with the hope that he would get elected. THEN the absolute power will start.
Since Trump's criminal trials are already ongoing, politically, he needs to use this appeal to avoid convictions now, though. Many polls have said that a lot of people wouldn't vote for him if he's convicted. I suspect some percentage of those people were telling the truth.
He's stalling the cases to use a much more conventional political vehicle for getting himself off the hook - presidential pardons. The immunity claim is a hail-mary stall tactic and Trump's team knows that it's bogus, but they also know he doesn't need absolute immunity if he can just survive until November.
Probably be cause that's a defacto power the executive branch has claimed and used since at least the Bush era.
Used? Really?
Yes. The US has on several occasions extra judicially killed American citizens without due process.
Ok but in context has it ever been used? Specifically to have a political opponent killed by a sitting US president?
Police (the government) kill people extra-judicially every day, which is different from the POTUS sending Seal Team 6 or whatever to kill their leading opponent for reelection
Yes & No we killed an American and his American son in Yemen. That made the news. Technically a terrorist is a political opponent; but it not necessarily a correlation here. The "more legitimate" examples are all with varying levels of conspiracy and they tend to be old because of the way information is disseminated. But things like JFK, RFK, MLK Jr., Malcom X, MOVE bombing etc... are all examples of the Hoover Era FBI exercising that power.
And we have rendition as a well known example of extrajudicial torture and murder of US citizens that we know has been used against Innocents in the past.