SCOTUS discusses immunity for the President

[Marener]

Yes it is. It's not part of the mother's body, it's a unique separate life. It is dependent, but that is the nature of mammalian procreation.

I do. However you don't see Lawrence being opposed as much as Roe, because of the above mentioned component of the abortion debate.

Saying the Constitution doesn't ban sodomy laws isn't the same as supporting sodomy laws. I am against laws regulating most activities between consenting adults. However I am a strict constructionist when it come to constitutions, which means I don't imprint my desires on my views of what the Constitution actually does or does not.

If it’s dependent, then its not separate.

Nah, you’re an authoritarian thug. You can afford to be a ”strict” constructionist because you know the constitution will never be used against you.

 

[progressive hunter]

If it’s dependent, then its not separate.

Nah, you’re an authoritarian thug. You can afford to be a ”strict” constructionist because you know the constitution will never be used against you.

because its dependent proves its another person,,

 

[martybegan]

If it’s dependent, then its not separate.

Nah, you’re an authoritarian thug. You can afford to be a ”strict” constructionist because you know the constitution will never be used against you.

It is separate because it has it's own DNA, it's own systems, it's own life.

Abortion is the one issue for me. I call for a 10-15 week bans on birth control abortions as reasonable and that makes me authoritarian?

meanwhile you probably love laws that fire people for using the wrong pronouns.

 

[Marener]

It is separate because it has it's own DNA, it's own systems, it's own life.

Abortion is the one issue for me. I call for a 10-15 week bans on birth control abortions as reasonable and that makes me authoritarian?

meanwhile you probably love laws that fire people for using the wrong pronouns.

Yes, that makes you an authoritarian.

What law fires people for pronouns? Last I checked an employer doesn’t need a law to fire someone.

Meanwhile you’re probably outraged that January 6th rioters are being prosecuted.

 

[progressive hunter]

Yes, that makes you an authoritarian.

What law fires people for pronouns? Last I checked an employer doesn’t need a law to fire someone.

Meanwhile you’re probably outraged that January 6th rioters are being prosecuted.

always with the TDS,,

you know I dont really blame you for ignoring me,,

after all who can argue with science and the dictionary,,

 

[martybegan]

Yes, that makes you an authoritarian.

What law fires people for pronouns? Last I checked an employer doesn’t need a law to fire someone.

Meanwhile you’re probably outraged that January 6th rioters are being prosecuted.

Not even close.

Nice dodge, I'm talking about support for laws like that.

They are being way way way over prosecuted. Meanwhile lefty twats like you got slaps on the wrist for protests starting with Floyd, continuing on to the Cop City bullshit in Atlanta, and now progressing on to the Hamas butt fucking lovefests currently happening.

 

[Marener]

Not even close.

Nice dodge, I'm talking about support for laws like that.

They are being way way way over prosecuted. Meanwhile lefty twats like you got slaps on the wrist for protests starting with Floyd, continuing on to the Cop City bullshit in Atlanta, and now progressing on to the Hamas butt fucking lovefests currently happening.

WTF are you talking about? I don’t support laws “like that” because there is absolutely no need for laws like that. You can get fired for damn near anything. I bet you support laws to prevent people for being fired for using the wrong pronouns.

Left wing protestors are routinely deprived of their rights to protest and beaten for about any reason whatsoever with zero repercussions. By continue to whine and moan about the rights of January 6th rioters.

 

[martybegan]

WTF are you talking about? I don’t support laws “like that” because there is absolutely no need for laws like that. You can get fired for damn near anything. I bet you support laws to prevent people for being fired for using the wrong pronouns.

Left wing protestors are routinely deprived of their rights to protest and beaten for about any reason whatsoever with zero repercussions. By continue to whine and moan about the rights of January 6th rioters.

Dodge duck, dip dive and dodge.

Any reason? LOLOLOLOLOL

 

[Marener]

always with the TDS,,

you know I dont really blame you for ignoring me,,

after all who can argue with science and the dictionary,,

I ignore you because there is absolutely no point trying to have a conversation with someone so completely incapable of honesty

 

[Marener]

Dodge duck, dip dive and dodge.

Any reason? LOLOLOLOLOL

People causing violence in those riots can and were prosecuted for it.

The cops causing violence and depriving people
of their rights werent.

Your right wing narrative falls apart when it comes to reality.

I bet you support laws requiring social media platforms to keep up shitposts from Nazis.

 

[progressive hunter]

I ignore you because there is absolutely no point trying to have a conversation with someone so completely incapable of honesty

honesty??

I am using science and the actual definition of the words,,

youre the one not being honest and ignoring science and the dictionary,,


both of us know youre ignoring me because you cant refute or argue with them,,

 

[martybegan]

People causing violence in those riots can and were prosecuted for it.

The cops causing violence and depriving people
of their rights werent.

Your right wing narrative falls apart when it comes to reality.

I bet you support laws requiring social media platforms to keep up shitposts from Nazis.

Some, but since most of these were in blue cities, the prosecutions were weaksauce, and then in many places they paid them off to settle "lawsuits" against the police.

Sorry, but hang out with violent idiots, get wrapped up with them.

I believe if a site calls itself a social commons, it should act like a commons.

But we had Elon take on censorship. Also you morons consider anyone to the right of Mitt Romney a Nazi.

 

[otto105]

US Supreme Court justices in Trump case lean toward some level of immunity

Conservative U.S. Supreme Court justices signaled sympathy on Thursday to the argument that presidents have some immunity against criminal charges for certain actions taken in office as it heard arguments over Donald Trump's claim of immunity from prosecution for trying to undo his 2020 election...

www.yahoo.com

SCOTUS began questioning each other as to if and how a President or former President could be held to account legally for anything

Here is a taste.

Sauer raised three hypothetical examples of past presidents being charged for officials actions taken as president.

He asked whether George W. Bush could be prosecuted for obstructing an official proceeding for allegedly lying to Congress to justify the Iraq war, or Barack Obama charged with murder for killing U.S. citizens abroad by drone strikes or Biden charged with unlawfully inducing immigrants to enter country illegally, based on his border policies.

"The answer to all these questions is no," Sauer said.


But Trump can be prosecuted for paying money to a whore to keep their affair private or hold Presidential files Biden had as a Senator?

Hilarious!!

Hilarious

He can be prosecuted for falsifying business records and illegal campaign contributions.

 

[Dragonlady]

00000000000000000

US Supreme Court justices in Trump case lean toward some level of immunity

Conservative U.S. Supreme Court justices signaled sympathy on Thursday to the argument that presidents have some immunity against criminal charges for certain actions taken in office as it heard arguments over Donald Trump's claim of immunity from prosecution for trying to undo his 2020 election...

www.yahoo.com

SCOTUS began questioning each other as to if and how a President or former President could be held to account legally for anything

Here is a taste.

Sauer raised three hypothetical examples of past presidents being charged for officials actions taken as president.

He asked whether George W. Bush could be prosecuted for obstructing an official proceeding for allegedly lying to Congress to justify the Iraq war, or Barack Obama charged with murder for killing U.S. citizens abroad by drone strikes or Biden charged with unlawfully inducing immigrants to enter country illegally, based on his border policies.

"The answer to all these questions is no," Sauer said.


But Trump can be prosecuted for paying money to a whore to keep their affair private or hold Presidential files Biden had as a Senator?

Hilarious!!

Hush money payments to porn stars isn't illegal. Falsifying corporate records and trying to claim the payments as a "business expense" is illegal. Neither of these acts is an "official act" of the President.

With regards to the classified records, when did Biden lie to the FBI about having the documents, obstruct the FBI's attempts to find the documents by moving them, or try to destroy evidence he had the documents????? That's why Trump is being charged and Biden isn't.

 

[Marener]

Some, but since most of these were in blue cities, the prosecutions were weaksauce, and then in many places they paid them off to settle "lawsuits" against the police.

Sorry, but hang out with violent idiots, get wrapped up with them.

I believe if a site calls itself a social commons, it should act like a commons.

But we had Elon take on censorship. Also you morons consider anyone to the right of Mitt Romney a Nazi.

The lawsuits against the police were largely justified given the police willingly and knowingly deprived Americans of their constititional rights.

Not that a strict constructionist like yourself gives a fuck because they weren’t your people.

Your opinion about what they should do isn’t the issue. Its about what the republicans are trying to pass laws for force people to do.

You’ll use government to force social media to propagate right wing extremism. You’ll also use government to expel students for failing to agree with Israeli military policy.

 

[martybegan]

The lawsuits against the police were largely justified given the police willingly and knowingly deprived Americans of their constititional rights.

Not that a strict constructionist like yourself gives a fuck because they weren’t your people.

Your opinion about what they should do isn’t the issue. Its about what the republicans are trying to pass laws for force people to do.

You’ll use government to force social media to propagate right wing extremism. You’ll also use government to expel students for failing to agree with Israeli military policy.

You don't have the right to riot. All these lefty wimps act all tough and resist arrest then whine about it.

What do you consider "right wing extremism? Saying a man is a man and a woman is a woman, or marriage is between a man and a woman?

 

[Marener]

You don't have the right to riot. All these lefty wimps act all tough and resist arrest then whine about it.

What do you consider "right wing extremism? Saying a man is a man and a woman is a woman, or marriage is between a man and a woman?

You authoritarians say anyone who looks different is a rioter and you send the police after them to beat them without justification and arrest them without charges that will stand in any constitutional court.

Right wing extremists have no problem talking about depriving Americans of their constitutional rights so they can maintain authority over the “others” who don’t look or think like them.

 

[Dragonlady]

Some, but since most of these were in blue cities, the prosecutions were weaksauce, and then in many places they paid them off to settle "lawsuits" against the police.

Sorry, but hang out with violent idiots, get wrapped up with them.

I believe if a site calls itself a social commons, it should act like a commons.

But we had Elon take on censorship. Also you morons consider anyone to the right of Mitt Romney a Nazi.

Elon is just another oligarch looking for power. He certainly not opposed to censorship, and would much prefer a dictatorship.

 

[martybegan]

You authoritarians say anyone who looks different is a rioter and you send the police after them to beat them without justification and arrest them without charges that will stand in any constitutional court.

Right wing extremists have no problem talking about depriving Americans of their constitutional rights so they can maintain authority over the “others” who don’t look or think like them.

No we say rioters are rioters.

Blah blah blah, standard lefty bullshit, blah blah blah.

 

[Marener]

No we say rioters are rioters.

Blah blah blah, standard lefty bullshit, blah blah blah.

Unless they’re Trump supporters. Then they’re just patriotic Americans on an impromptu unguided tour of the Capitol.

You don’t know what you’re talking about.