286
submitted 4 months ago by jeffw@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 170 points 4 months ago

That a literal case of stealing state secrets and refusing to return them could possibly be shielded by this ruling demonstrates just how insane it is.

[-] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 77 points 4 months ago

a literal case of stealing state secrets and refusing to return them

I can't imagine how anyone could make a serious argument that is an "official act".

I know they'll try, but it's cartoon villain levels of ridiculous.

[-] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 50 points 4 months ago

The layers of protection provided in the Supreme Court ruling makes it very easy to justify either immunity or simply excluding all evidence of a non-official crime. It's much broader than just "official vs. non-official". The LegalEagle YouTube channel has a good run through of all the ways in which immunity or effective immunity could be achieved and it's bad. "Top 5 worst Supreme Court rulings ever."

[-] Kolrami@lemmy.world 9 points 4 months ago

It may not matter at all. Imagine it's deemed unofficial and he wins the election, he will almost definitely pardon himself. Pardon powers were never given reasonable limits.

People have undervalued that the real check on a president's powers is in the hands of the voters. The next strongest checks seem to be the lifespan of the executive and the two term limit.

[-] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 months ago

Oh, I know he's going to try any and all bullshit tactics to cover his ass, just like he always has.

I'm just hoping there are still a couple of checks and balances left un-shredded to not let him fully get away with it.

[-] ramble81@lemm.ee 7 points 4 months ago

Here’s how it’s gonna work:

  1. Claim immunity in this case? “Well why? You weren’t the president”
  2. Claim that the 2020 election was “stolen” and that he rightfully was President when 1 occured
  3. Claim 1/6 was “official” too due to a stolen election

Because, sadly, some of those others are still in limbo, Canon will be more than happy to put things on hold “while preceding matters are sorted out”

[-] ricecake@sh.itjust.works 4 points 4 months ago

Because the ruling quite literally says that anything the president does as the president is presumed to have immunity unless the prosecution can argue that applying criminal law couldn't possibly impact on the core work of the office of the president, and that their motivation for doing what they do can't be considered when making that determination.

"As the president" Trump asked the justice department to falsely claim it had discovered election fraud as part of a plot to steal the election.
The supreme Court ruled that this is protected because if you ignore his motivation, punishing the president for consulting with the justice department about election fraud would clearly impede the core functions of the office.

Without considering motivation, would punishing the president for transporting documents he has legal access to to a place he's allowed to take them impact impact the function of the office?

It's a very bad ruling.

[-] JeeBaiChow@lemmy.world 61 points 4 months ago

He was no longer president. How is this an official act?

[-] Heikki@lemm.ee 16 points 4 months ago
  1. He may try to argue he took them while he was president, and therefore, no charges can be filed. Actions and motives while the president can not be looked at either.

  2. In the immunity ruling, "Just Us" CT added a note he thought Jack Smiths appointment was illegitimate. This means that if she tosses the entire case, it will inevitably get to the SCOTUS where there is at least 1 friendly judge that would let him off. Judging by the 6-3 ruling, I wouldn't be surprised if there were actually 6 judges.

I am sure Jack Smith can argue all the other crimes of keeping, obstructing, and distributing the documents to those with out security clerence is still a crime but it's if the question of his legitimacy if the reason. I think the SCTUS will agree with Cannon over the actual law for some BS reasons the founding fathers are believed to have said along time ago.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Natanael@slrpnk.net 4 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

It would force them to drop evidence about his state of mind when he took the documents. They would essentially be unable to argue anything at all about how they ended up there. The case would then ONLY be about him not returning them later on request, with no other context available for the ruling

[-] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago

Don't they have proof of him having them moved after the fact to try and hide he had them?

[-] dactylotheca@suppo.fi 43 points 4 months ago

Why doesn't Biden just have Trump and the conservative SC judges shot for treason? It'd be an "official act" and therefore OK according to conservatives, after all. It'd make the world in general a better place, and also help stop the US sliding (further…) into fascism

[-] ptz@dubvee.org 33 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

I'm getting tired of hearing these "Why doesn't Biden just be a despot to stop another despot?" knee-jerk takes. Even as a joke, it's not helping. Once you stoop to your enemy's level, is there a difference anymore? Think about the kind of precedent that sets. As a country, can you even come back from that? We'd be trading one very dark path for another.

We have a system of checks and balances that can be used, assuming we elect people who aren't part of the problem.

People need to get the fuck out and vote. Every election, every office, school board seat, dogcatcher, etc. Got friends who don't vote? Try to get at least one of them to. Yeah, gerrymandering exists but it doesn't hold a candle to voter apathy when it comes to damage done.

Glad to know I'm getting downvoted because I don't support becoming the very thing we're supposedly fighting against.

[-] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 35 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Unilaterally taking away your own options doesn't help either. You can be damn sure Trump, and Republicans in general, will do whatever they think they can get away with. Remember when a year before the election was too early to nominate a supreme court Justice, but later it was totally cool to jam one through during the election.

[-] ptz@dubvee.org 8 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Remember when a year before the election was too early to nominate a supreme court Justice, but later it was totally cool to jam one through during the election.

~~Pepperidge Farm~~ Admiral Patrick remembers.

That also can be fixed by my "get out and vote" + "vote for people who aren't part of the problem". Both of those supreme court seats were stolen by Mitch "Fucking Hypocrite/Dirty Bastard" McConnell** whose reptilian fingerprints are all over that mockery of our constitution.

SC justices can be impeached and removed, but there need to be enough in Congress who aren't in on the plan to make that happen. Again, get out and vote for people who aren't part of the problem. Tell your friends, too, lol.

** Reptilian because he looks like a cartoon turtle; I don't believe in lizard people lol

[-] ooterness@lemmy.world 26 points 4 months ago

I'm tired of having to choose between "Uvalde shooter" and "Uvalde cops" in every election. Fucking do something or get out of the way.

[-] conditional_soup@lemm.ee 1 points 4 months ago

My God, it's beautiful

[-] eran_morad@lemmy.world 14 points 4 months ago

Too late for this high road bullshit.

[-] ptz@dubvee.org 4 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

I stand by my original statement. Once you abandon your core values and stoop to your enemy's level, is there a difference anymore?

[-] eran_morad@lemmy.world 16 points 4 months ago

Yeah, there is. Many lives are at stake. It’s a trolley problem. Shit’s ugly and you can’t wish it away.

[-] Notorious_handholder@lemmy.world 12 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

At some point you have to make a choice. Either grab a hose to help put out the fire and fix things or you stand on your high ground, praising yourself for how noble your intentions are as everything around you burns.

High roading only works if your opponent has a conscience and can understand guilt. The side that is playing with matches and gasoline this whole time has shown very much that they do not have one.

And to address your original point, yes there very much is a difference. One side is doing things for tye sake of hurt others or progressing a goal that is downright evil and tyrannical. Your doing it to protect the people they're trying to hurt and to oppose their tyranny.

Will it be clean? No... but anything worth fighting for has never been clean. The world isn't just black and white. And the idea that stooping to anothers level makes you the same as them is about as binary as you can get. The world is filled with nuance and a whole range of colors that needs to be observed

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de 10 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Once you completely ignore the paradox of tolerance, you are already on an inevitable path to a fascist dictatorship.

[-] conditional_soup@lemm.ee 11 points 4 months ago

What's the point of high-roading if the destination is fascism? You going to hold your head high as you're being dragged off to jail for not submitting your period tracker data to the state, telling yourself that at least you're suffering nobly?

[-] ptz@dubvee.org 4 points 4 months ago

What's the point of high-roading if the destination is fascism?

Because you're just ushering in a different flavor of fascism? You may solve the immediate crisis, but make no mistake, you're creating (or at least exacerbating) a brand new crisis.

[-] conditional_soup@lemm.ee 3 points 4 months ago

Under those standards, the American revolution was fascism and shouldn't have happened.

[-] ptz@dubvee.org 0 points 4 months ago

Absolute false equivalence, and I'm done with this thread.

[-] conditional_soup@lemm.ee 4 points 4 months ago

It's only false equivalence because the American revolution worked out for the US, and was therefore retroactively justified.

No shame in setting limits for yourself.

[-] MajinBlayze@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

Not all authoritarianism is fascism

[-] ptz@dubvee.org 1 points 4 months ago

And neither authoritarianism nor fascism are compatible with the principles our country was founded on. What's you point?

[-] MajinBlayze@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

The point is that if the destination is fascism, violence might be justified if no other avenue is available.

Like yes, the rhetoric is obviously extreme, but that might be what's necessary to get the Democratic party to actually use the tools available to them, like packing the courts

[-] ptz@dubvee.org 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Once we get there, sure, whatever, if that's what it takes. But unless or, god forbid, until we reach that point, then there is no way you or anyone is going to convince me that abandoning our core values is the right way forward.

Nick Fury saying 'Until such time as the world ends, we will act as though it intends to spin on'

[-] MajinBlayze@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

That's cute. It's a short, punchy statement to absolve yourself of responsibility to help.

It's also fantasy.

There will be a lot of real harm done to real people in the transition to fascism. Not doing everything you can to stop it is allowing that harm to happen.

[-] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Armed Robbers Fleeing Bank

Cops Pull Out Guns: FREEZE! PUT YOUR HANDS UP IN THE AIR!

Armed Robbers: Pulls out guns aims at cops!

Cops: Maybe he won't shoot, lets wait and find out!

Armed Robbers: Kills all the cops, runs away.

News at 6pm - July 12th: The armed robbers who shot and killed everyone in the bank on July 10th have done it again, this time killing all the cops outside as they fled. Who would have ever guessed they'd shoot at the cops after having killed everyone in the bank 2 days prior!

[-] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Ultimately, this might be the last 6 months anything can be done about this.

If Trump wins, it could very well be the last election, or they will be rigged so bad they make Putin shameful that he can't be that blatantly obvious.

So 'once we get there' might mean the only solution is even worse than using the current legitimate options and newly provided power to the presidency.

Edit: The dude already tried to stage a coup, murder the VP, and incited an insurrection. Things will not go well if he wins, and he's going to get off on it all as immune.

[-] ptz@dubvee.org 1 points 4 months ago

Then you should vote, vote smart, and get as many people to join you as possible. That's my plan.

[-] takeda@lemmy.world 7 points 4 months ago

Trump is openly saying he will do that. This won't be fixed without amending the Constitution or SCOTUS receiving that decision.

[-] girsaysdoom@sh.itjust.works 4 points 4 months ago

Here's the problem: we're watching the country errode in incredible time, the far right has sunk it's claws into the government and it seemingly has no way to actually prevent it's damage. All of the checks and balances seem to mean nothing as actual laws that people relied on are being repealed every month. And this might not be the worst of it, if Trump gets elected with a Senate majority, everything will probably flip seemingly overnight.

All we can do is vote and call representatives to tell them to support us. You could probably protest too but be careful out there. If you're someone that might be targeted by an auth right regime, you might want to get your passport ready.

[-] MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

Fascism depends on the erosion of norms. Stooping to their level does nothing but empower them in the long run. If anything, it accelerates the process.

[-] snooggums@midwest.social 5 points 4 months ago

Glad to know I’m getting downvoted because I don’t support becoming the very thing we’re supposedly fighting against.

"Don't fight back, just lay back and take it!"

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Hildegarde@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

The court's ruling prevents the president from being personally charged criminally for official acts during the presidency. The ruling doesn't give the executive branch unlimited powers. The ruling doesn't put the executive branch above the authority of the courts. The ruling doesn't force federal employees to blindly follow any order given by the president. Courts and congress can stop the executive branch. The checks and balances still exist.

The president can't be charged for any crimes they commit when on duty, just like cops and CEOs. They charge the organization with the crime to shield the individual who actually did the crime. This is american justice. Turns out many people are above the law.

The threat of eventual prosecution is not the only thing preventing widespread political assassinations.

[-] snooggums@midwest.social 4 points 4 months ago

The president can’t be charged for any crimes they commit when on duty, just like cops and CEOs.

You do know that is a problem, right?

[-] Hildegarde@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

Yes... That's why I mentioned it.

[-] otp@sh.itjust.works 3 points 4 months ago

So you're saying that Biden personally needs to do it?

[-] ricecake@sh.itjust.works 4 points 4 months ago

More realistically, in that it still won't happen but it involves more paperwork and less people with guns so the it done easier to get done: use the executive powers to declare their homes national parks open to the general public.
Or order the Treasury department to put them on the list of people banks can't do business with. One person in the Treasury making a 30 second form entry, and over the next few days it'll trickle out and freeze their accounts, credit cards, mortgages, and everything. Sure, the random banker involved could override it but they, ironically, have personal criminal liability risk if they do so, and do they really want to risk a decade in prison rather than let the lawyers fight about it?

[-] Olhonestjim@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

Immunity and authority are two different things. There is no reason to believe an unlawful order would be obeyed under Biden.

[-] werefreeatlast@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

One of the core functions of the presidency is to sell secrets and advance foreign technology such that they may hurt our country economically in the future. Yeah, let's absolve Trump of this too. And if we could also bring three or 4 virgins for him to rape comfortably during the preceding that would be great 👍.

[-] werefreeatlast@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

Your honor, could you please bring Trump to the podium? Oh it's ok, that's how he does it. He usually doesn't grab too hard so no worries, your pussy will be just fine.

[-] MrPoopyButthole@lemm.ee 0 points 4 months ago
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 06 Jul 2024
286 points (97.0% liked)

News

23409 readers
1907 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS