It's funny (or 'funny' if you prefer) that US Republicans are monarchists instead of republicans.
this post was submitted on 02 Jul 2024
234 points (96.8% liked)
politics
19103 readers
4511 users here now
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.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- 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. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- 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
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Remember when they were complaining that Obama was acting like a king? It turns out they like kings after all.
Maybe they're just looking for certain.... Characteristics..... in a King.
I'm guessing "The Blueprint: Obama's Plan to Subvert the Constitution and Build an Imperial Presidency" was actually more projection than it was a condemnation of actual policies.
Huh don't recall this. Was it a big deal at the time?
Also from Amazon description:
Courts: The authors have insider knowledge of how Obama will pack the Supreme Court and lower courts with activist judges who will overstep their constitutional authority.
Lol.
Yeah, every accusation is a confession. I'm sure the GOP playbook for years has been: accuse the Left of doing X; do X yourself but in the name of trying to "level the playing field".
This week on "every accusation is a confession"...
It's what they call themselves, that's it. The Democratic People's Republic of Korea is also none of those things.
The Democratic People's Republic of Korea is also none of those things.
Not even Korea? 😮
Nope, it's actually a colony of Norway (/s)
TIL
iTs a rEpUbLiC nOt a dEmoCraCy.
There's a reason why they keep saying that recently, they don't want democracy. They want to backflip themselves into selecting how leaders are chosen and who gets to choose.
Trump wouldn't be where he is if media like The NY Times didn't circlejerk his existence. Had the media ignored their cash cow from the start we wouldn't be facing the end of democracy.
The abject failure of corporate news in assessing our current situation of befuckededness cannot be overstated.
But Jon Stewart still continues to try, thankfully! He is the hero that we need, even if not the one we deserve right now, or whatever (line from Batman) - I doubt he can save us from ourselves, but damn I'm sure glad to see him on the air again nonetheless.
I would vote for Jon Stewart in a hearbeat.
He is too smart to ever run though:-D.
Too bad Biden has repeatedly said he won't use it to his advantage to stop fascism and what he's telling us would be the end of American democracy...
You can't half ass the fight against fascism.
Be a use they'll always do everything they can.
If trump is an existential threat to American democracy, we need to start fucking acting like it.
Unprecedented times call for unprecedented actions. This is a situation in which I would cheer for someone pulling the ladder up behind them. Use their God-King power to destroy their God-King power. Come on, King Biden.
He didn't even need this
He could have expanded the courts as soon as he took office and prevented so much harm.
He just didn't want to.
Which Congress would've approved this? The one that couldn't get the federal minimum wage increased or the one that couldn't pass a border security bill?
So I've seen lots of commentary about this ruling, but I kind of assumed that the panic was overblown. After all, the ruling said presidents were only immune for "official acts" but could still be held accountable for "unofficial acts", right? Well fuck, turns out I was wrong.
“In dividing official from unofficial conduct, courts may not inquire into the president’s motives,” [Chief Justice] Roberts writes. “Such an inquiry would risk exposing even the most obvious instances of official conduct to judicial examination on the mere allegation of improper purpose, thereby intruding on the Article II interests that immunity seeks to protest.”
They're literally saying that there is no way to determine what is an official act and what is not. So Biden could order someone to go shoot Trump, and we couldn't even inquire into if he was acting in an official capacity or not.
Well, agencies have failed, justice has failed, and we expect the military (or some part of it) will also fail next.
A military coup probably won't happen. The federal government is still pretty in line with the people's interest, even if the media makes it seem otherwise.
Yeah, until project 2025 drains those positions of anything but loyalists.
Somehow “probably won’t happen” is a bit underwhelming. The amount of neo-nazis and assorted relevant flavors in the military is too damned high.
There’s also the practical matter of the Constitution preventing them from law enforcement (which - yeah, i know). I’m saying the odds that it’s us out here alone are . . . well, also, too damned high.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
In 1977, nearly three years after leaving office in disgrace, President Richard Nixon gave a series of interviews to David Frost, a British journalist.
“Such an inquiry would risk exposing even the most obvious instances of official conduct to judicial examination on the mere allegation of improper purpose, thereby intruding on the Article II interests that immunity seeks to protest.” In other words, the why of a president’s actions cannot be held as evidence against him, even if they’re plainly illegitimate.
Turning to Trump’s attempt to pressure Mike Pence into delaying certification of the Electoral College, Roberts says that this too was an official act.
But more troubling than the court’s interference in the democratic process are the disturbing implications of the majority’s decision, which undermines the foundations of republican government at the same time that it purports to be a strike in defense of the constitutional order.
“The court,” Sotomayor writes, “effectively creates a law-free zone around the president, upsetting the status quo that has existed since the founding.” When he uses his official powers in any way, she continues, “he now will be insulated from criminal prosecution.
In their relentless drive to protect a Republican president and secure his power for a future administration, the conservative majority has issued a fundamentally anti-republican opinion.
The original article contains 1,324 words, the summary contains 215 words. Saved 84%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
Biden should just shit can the tRump appointed judges. Tell them they have two choices; You resign, or you die.
Pretty sure their timing of releasing this ruling and immediate adjournment was no coincidence. I hope the conservative justices shit bricks the next time they're all in the same room.
Alternative caption to the article's photo:
Trump blissfully sniffs his own explosive fart while the crowd screams and tries to make a panicked escape
