The Supreme Court of the United States Thread

#10,752
#10,752
Okay, maybe one of our "lawyers" can explain the immunity decision to me. I didn't think they ruled in favor of blanket immunity, just any official actions taken as POTUS. Is that wrong? If Trump committed crimes that had nothing to do with his office, he can still be prosecuted. That's what I got from the article I read, but maybe I'm wrong? Lawyers?
 
  • Like
Reactions: KptVFL, MemphisVol77, Sandman 423 and 2 others
#10,753
#10,753
K-town Vol Fan said:
We are living and witnessing the downfall of this country. And his name is Donald Trump. His SCOTUS overturned R V. W and gave him immunity to commit crimes as long as it's "official." Pushing the Bible in public school is downright shameful religion does not belong in school. You go to school to learn life skills anything religious is indoctrination, something R's are constantly squawking about.
Click to expand...
His SCOTUS? Even with recusals of his two appointments it is still ruled 4-3.
He doesnt govern OK either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UT_Dutchman, MemphisVol77, StarRaider and 1 other person
#10,754
#10,754
volbound1700 said:
Meh...no one is trying to put Bible in Public School and even if they did, it isn't like Christianity doesn't have the winning track record:

British Empire, French until 1800s, Hapsburg Empires, Spain, Czarist Russia, etc. All the great modern powers at their height were "Christian" and they conquered the world and basically built the world we have today.

Leaders like Charles V, Elizabeth I, Victoria, Isabella, Peter the Great, and Catherine the Great were all pretty staunch Christians or defenders of it.

Heck even the Roman Empire went Christian back in the day after failing to kill it off.

Go play some Crusader Kings or EU4, you will get the jibe. You can resurrect the Byzantine Empire, have the Holy Roman Empire conquer all of Europe, or lead Castile/Spain to take out those pesky Aztecs and MesoAmericans.
Click to expand...
that sounds fun.
 
#10,757
#10,757
An excerpt from the New York Times Editorial on the court's absurd immunity decision....

"As of Monday, the bedrock principle that no one is above the law has been set aside. In the very week that the nation celebrates its founding, the court undermined the reason for the American Revolution by giving presidents what one dissenting justice called a “law-free zone” in which to act, taking a step toward restoring the monarchy that the Declaration of Independence rejected. Presidents can still be impeached for their crimes in office, but it is hard to see how they can ever be prosecuted. They can take once-unimaginable actions, like encouraging an insurrection at the U.S. Capitol, with no fear of later going to jail or being held legally accountable."
 
#10,758
#10,758
turbovol said:
Of course he's fit to serve today. He is serving today. Let me go find the 3-minute clip of Trump screwing up everybody's name---or telling
us to inject bleach into our veins.....
Click to expand...
So you want to ignore the primary votes that said he should be your nominee bc of one bad night? You hate democracy bro
 
  • Like
Reactions: UT_Dutchman, KptVFL, MemphisVol77 and 2 others
#10,760
#10,760
If official actions taken as President are NOT protected, would that mean Obama could be prosecuted for murder? Wasn't an American killed in one of his drone strikes? Illegal actions taken apart from the office should be prosecutable, but there is a certain amount of "above the law" that exists for politicians, and especially the office of President.


Also, if we're being intellectually honest, Trump has committed crimes (maybe not all the ones he is accused of, but I'm fairly sure he has committed crimes), but the only reason he is facing prosecution is because he's running again. It's completely political. Joe Biden has broken laws, but there are no cries from the press or his supporters to prosecute him. Other politicians have committed crimes with no actions taken. You can't choose to selectively prosecute members of the other party and not expect for it to be seen as bias prosecution. I'm all for prosecuting politicians and getting the worst offenders out of office, but it can't be divided by who controls the government.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KptVFL and InVOLuntary
#10,762
#10,762
turbovol said:
Of course he's fit to serve today. He is serving today. Let me go find the 3-minute clip of Trump screwing up everybody's name---or telling
us to inject bleach into our veins.....
Click to expand...
If you actually believe that then you strike me as one of those "I was just following orders" type of people.

I can promise you that you can't find Trump saying "inject bleach" into your veins. You and people like you took the rambling of a nonmedical professional and spun it your own crazy way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LibertyVol
#10,764
#10,764
turbovol said:
Of course he's fit to serve today. He is serving today. Let me go find the 3-minute clip of Trump screwing up everybody's name---or telling
us to inject bleach into our veins.....
Click to expand...
I would love to see the clip if him saying to inject bleach into our veins. Of coarse you may want to actually watch it before you post.
 
  • Like
Reactions: whodeycin85
#10,767
#10,767
Weezer said:
If official actions taken as President are NOT protected, would that mean Obama could be prosecuted for murder? Wasn't an American killed in one of his drone strikes? Illegal actions taken apart from the office should be prosecutable, but there is a certain amount of "above the law" that exists for politicians, and especially the office of President.


Also, if we're being intellectually honest, Trump has committed crimes (maybe not all the ones he is accused of, but I'm fairly sure he has committed crimes), but the only reason he is facing prosecution is because he's running again. It's completely political. Joe Biden has broken laws, but there are no cries from the press or his supporters to prosecute him. Other politicians have committed crimes with no actions taken. You can't choose to selectively prosecute members of the other party and not expect for it to be seen as bias prosecution. I'm all for prosecuting politicians and getting the worst offenders out of office, but it can't be divided by who controls the government.
Click to expand...

I take it all differently, Obama could and should be prosecuted for murder as what he did is not an official act. If he had ordered a strike that was not targeting Americans than it would most likely be an official act. The U.S. was never given authority by The People to murder their citizens, that just simply doesn't exist. Matter of fact, they went way out of their way to pinpoint that the government must give due process.

Any crimes committed by the President should be handled with care, the loonies don't care about this... they intent is to destroy the country with whatever means necessary.

All Presidents commit murder, the question is should the former President be prosecuted for murder of an American, absolutely. If it were Trump or whoever I would say the same thing.
 
Last edited:
#10,768
#10,768
The propaganda machine of the Democratic Party continuing to prey on the ignorant into thinking a president is immune in committing official acts even if it breaks the law…they seem to think lower courts are so corrupt that they won’t prosecute him and deem those acts unofficial in their capacity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary
#10,769
#10,769
LSU-SIU said:
I take it all differently, Obama could and should be prosecuted for murder as what he did is not an official act. If he had ordered a strike that was not targeting Americans than it would most likely be an official act. The U.S. was never given authority by The People to murder their citizens, that just simply doesn't exist. Matter of fact, they went way out of their way to pinpoint that the government must give due process.

Any crimes committed by the President should be handled with care, the loonies don't care about this... they intent is to destroy the country with whatever means necessary.

All Presidents commit murder, the question is should the former President be prosecuted for murder of an American, absolutely. If it were Trump or whoever I would say the same thing.
Click to expand...
If they would have killed him inside the US I would agree 100%. Kid played stupid games though.
 
#10,770
#10,770
Sandman 423 said:
If they would have killed him inside the US I would agree 100%. Kid played stupid games though.
Click to expand...
It has nothing to do with being in the U.S., the U.S. can't deprive a citizen of due process simply because he's not in the country.

No authority exists in this context for Obama to murder U.S. citizens. Can Obama murder non-U.S. citizens outside the U.S., generally speaking yes, although there might be some restrictions statutorily. Congress can't statutorily give the executive branch any help here either as the authority was never given to the U.S. to start with. And for good reason.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Vol since 77, volfanhill and LouderVol
#10,771
#10,771
LSU-SIU said:
I take it all differently, Obama could and should be prosecuted for murder as what he did is not an official act. If he had ordered a strike that was not targeting Americans than it would most likely be an official act. The U.S. was never given authority by The People to murder their citizens, that just simply doesn't exist. Matter of fact, they went way out of their way to pinpoint that the government must give due process.

Any crimes committed by the President should be handled with care, the loonies don't care about this... they intent is to destroy the country with whatever means necessary.

All Presidents commit murder, the question is should the former President be prosecuted for murder of an American, absolutely. If it were Trump or whoever I would say the same thing.
Click to expand...
So you would advocate for soldiers going in to arrest him? What if he had resisted and shot at them? Is it okay to kill him in self-defense at that point? I just don't share your opinion that it was not a Presidential act. But, if even Presidential acts are prosecutable, I think a case could be made. I also think cases could be made against Biden. Probably every President could have been charged with something. So there has to be some immunity for Presidents, even Trump. Just not blanket immunity.
 
#10,772
#10,772
Weezer said:
So you would advocate for soldiers going in to arrest him? What if he had resisted and shot at them? Is it okay to kill him in self-defense at that point? I just don't share your opinion that it was not a Presidential act. But, if even Presidential acts are prosecutable, I think a case could be made. I also think cases could be made against Biden. Probably every President could have been charged with something. So there has to be some immunity for Presidents, even Trump. Just not blanket immunity.
Click to expand...

Its not an official Presidential act because the President nor anyone in the U.S. has been given that authority in that context.

So there has to be some immunity for Presidents
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
It already exists, which is what the Supreme Court said.

So you would advocate for soldiers going in to arrest him?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

I don't know what this means, DOJ should be or should have pressed charges against Obama. In the instance back when it happened, Congress should have started the impeachment process.

So, when people say X country/government murders their own people.... include the U.S. in that list.

Murder and treason by Obama.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: volinsd, Vol since 77 and 82_VOL_83
#10,774
#10,774
Orangeburst said:
that sounds fun.
Click to expand...

I just love to remind people of their historical roots.

There is this funny quote I always remembered from this USA Special back in the day about Attila that had Gerald Butler playing Attila.

In it, Gerald Butler (as Attila) makes comments mocking the Romans for being tricky and deceit of the Romans being un-honorable and Powers Boothe (who played Flavius Aetius) has one quick response:

"Which way rules the world"

Progressives want to mock the past and past generations but they were winning wars, establishing empires, building world wonders, producing art, etc. Perhaps they are mocking us.

For example, Spanish Conquistadors took over and held onto Mexico with ~1,200 man while USA struggled to hold onto Afghanistan with significantly more resources.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orangeburst
#10,775
#10,775
volbound1700 said:
I just love to remind people of their historical roots.

There is this funny quote I always remembered from this USA Special back in the day about Attila that had Gerald Butler playing Attila.

In it, Gerald Butler (as Attila) makes comments mocking the Romans for being tricky and deceit of the Romans being un-honorable and Powers Boothe (who played Flavius Aetius) has one quick response:

"Which way rules the world"

Progressives want to mock the past and past generations but they were winning wars, establishing empires, building world wonders, producing art, etc. Perhaps they are mocking us.

For example, Spanish Conquistadors took over and held onto Mexico with ~1,200 man while USA struggled to hold onto Afghanistan with significantly more resources.
Click to expand...
its generally a lot easier to hold the territory when the population of natives has been reduced dramatically. in some places, not Mexico, the spanish only ruled over a population that was 10% what it was before their arrival.

accepting the "good ole days" involves a whole lot forgotten details.

the same spanish squandered all those riches and power in less than 200 years btw.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top