Logical next step?

[Billiejeens]

The Framers designed the Presidency to provide for a “vigorous” and “energetic” Executive. The Federalist No. 70, pp. 471–472 (J. Cooke ed. 1961) (A. Hamilton). They vested the President with “supervisory and policy responsibilities of utmost discretion and sensitivity.” Nixon v. Fitzgerald, 457 U. S. 731, 750.

Appreciating the “unique risks” that arise when the President’s energies are diverted by proceedings that might render him “unduly cautious in the discharge of his official duties,” the Court has recognized Presidential immunities and privileges “rooted in the constitutional tradition of the separation of powers and supported by our history.” Id., at 749, 751, 752, n. 32.

In Fitzgerald, for instance, the Court concluded that a former President is entitled to absolute immunity from “damages liability for acts within the ‘outer perimeter’ of his official responsibility.” Id., at 756.

The Court’s “dominant concern” was to avoid “diversion of the President’s attention during the decision making process caused by needless worry as to the possibility of damages actions stemming from any particular official decision.” Clinton v. Jones, 520 U. S. 681, 694, n. 19.

 

[Hum Dinger]

First, I'm not advocating for any harm to come to trump, or any of his supporters, but in the light of the recent Supreme court ruling, serious uncomfortable questions present themselves. A reasonable person might believe trumps threats to seek revenge on his opponents, as well as his offer to trade environmental protections for a billion dollars present a threat to the constitution and the wellbeing of the country. Having sworn to protect and defend the constitution, and in light of the new presidential authority, it is Biden's duty to prevent any chance of trump winning the upcoming presidential election in any way his newfound authority allows. Should Biden, exercise his newfound authority by imprisoning trump in Guantanamo, or some other way? If congress opposes such actions, they can always impeach him if they can get enough of our representatives to find him guilty.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/07/01/trump-immunity-scotus-decision-full-text-pdf/

While I agree with the sentiment, I don't think that it will be necessary.

It's standard practice for sentencing Judges to take into account all known information about a convicted criminal when determining the sentence. I'm hoping Judge Merchan throws the book at Trump - hopefully 34 consecutive 4 year sentences.

Trump was a dumbass for insulting Merchan's daughter!

Trump may appeal the sentence, but that could take years.

BTW - Given yesterday's SCOTUS decision, it would be easier for Biden to just drop a tactical nuke on Mar-a-largo! No great loss.

 

[Billiejeens]

While I agree with the sentiment, I don't think that it will be necessary.

It's standard practice for sentencing Judges to take into account all known information about a convicted criminal when determining the sentence. I'm hoping Judge Merchan throws the book at Trump - hopefully 34 consecutive 4 year sentences.

Trump was a dumbass for insulting Merchan's daughter!

Trump may appeal the sentence, but that could take years.

BTW - Given yesterday's SCOTUS decision, it would be easier for Biden to just drop a tactical nuke on Mar-a-largo! No great loss.

You are an idiot.

 

[Billiejeens]

While I agree with the sentiment, I don't think that it will be necessary.

It's standard practice for sentencing Judges to take into account all known information about a convicted criminal when determining the sentence. I'm hoping Judge Merchan throws the book at Trump - hopefully 34 consecutive 4 year sentences.

Trump was a dumbass for insulting Merchan's daughter!

Trump may appeal the sentence, but that could take years.

BTW - Given yesterday's SCOTUS decision, it would be easier for Biden to just drop a tactical nuke on Mar-a-largo! No great loss.

The Framers designed the Presidency to provide for a “vigorous” and “energetic” Executive. The Federalist No. 70, pp. 471–472 (J. Cooke ed. 1961) (A. Hamilton). They vested the President with “supervisory and policy responsibilities of utmost discretion and sensitivity.” Nixon v. Fitzgerald, 457 U. S. 731, 750.

Appreciating the “unique risks” that arise when the President’s energies are diverted by proceedings that might render him “unduly cautious in the discharge of his official duties,” the Court has recognized Presidential immunities and privileges “rooted in the constitutional tradition of the separation of powers and supported by our history.” Id., at 749, 751, 752, n. 32.

In Fitzgerald, for instance, the Court concluded that a former President is entitled to absolute immunity from “damages liability for acts within the ‘outer perimeter’ of his official responsibility.” Id., at 756.

The Court’s “dominant concern” was to avoid “diversion of the President’s attention during the decision making process caused by needless worry as to the possibility of damages actions stemming from any particular official decision.” Clinton v. Jones, 520 U. S. 681, 694, n. 19.

 

[Hum Dinger]

The Framers designed the Presidency to provide for a “vigorous” and “energetic” Executive. The Federalist No. 70, pp. 471–472 (J. Cooke ed. 1961) (A. Hamilton). They vested the President with “supervisory and policy responsibilities of utmost discretion and sensitivity.” Nixon v. Fitzgerald, 457 U. S. 731, 750.

Appreciating the “unique risks” that arise when the President’s energies are diverted by proceedings that might render him “unduly cautious in the discharge of his official duties,” the Court has recognized Presidential immunities and privileges “rooted in the constitutional tradition of the separation of powers and supported by our history.” Id., at 749, 751, 752, n. 32.

In Fitzgerald, for instance, the Court concluded that a former President is entitled to absolute immunity from “damages liability for acts within the ‘outer perimeter’ of his official responsibility.” Id., at 756.

The Court’s “dominant concern” was to avoid “diversion of the President’s attention during the decision making process caused by needless worry as to the possibility of damages actions stemming from any particular official decision.” Clinton v. Jones, 520 U. S. 681, 694, n. 19.

None of that pertains to the criminal conviction in New York.

None of the crimes Trump committed in the New York case were remotely related to official duties of the President.

BTW - If you didn't understand that I was joking when I suggested nuking Mar-a-Largo, then you're a flaming idiot.

 

[BULLDOG]

While I agree with the sentiment, I don't think that it will be necessary.

It's standard practice for sentencing Judges to take into account all known information about a convicted criminal when determining the sentence. I'm hoping Judge Merchan throws the book at Trump - hopefully 34 consecutive 4 year sentences.

Trump was a dumbass for insulting Merchan's daughter!

Trump may appeal the sentence, but that could take years.

BTW - Given yesterday's SCOTUS decision, it would be easier for Biden to just drop a tactical nuke on Mar-a-largo! No great loss.

All true, but we are still stuck, for now, with a massive uncalled-for power for this and all future presidents. That is too big of a hazard for us to tolerate. We may never have another president as evil and dangerous as trump, but we need safeguards in case we do.

 

[Billiejeens]

All true, but we are still stuck, for now, with a massive uncalled-for power for this and all future presidents. That is too big of a hazard for us to tolerate. We may never have another president as evil and dangerous as trump, but we need safeguards in case we do.

Nothing changed
You have been duped, again.

 

[whitehall]

Revenge to some, politics as usual to others. Thank God we had at least 6 Justices who upheld the Constitution or Banana Republic democrats would be arresting president Trump for doing his job and the Country would be in chaos.

 

[OKTexas]

It isn’t? So if the President is asked questions about top secret information under oath he must answer those questions?

There are many ways to answer and not lie.

.

 

[BULLDOG]

Nothing changed
You have been duped, again.

Let's see. Should I accept the evaluation of the best legal authorities, or go with the word of some anonymous idiot on the internet? I'll consider that choice and get back with you.

 

[Billiejeens]

Let's see. Should I accept the evaluation of the best legal authorities, or go with the word of some anonymous idiot on the internet? I'll consider that choice and get back with you.

You could just read actual legal experts instead of the loons.

 

[BULLDOG]

You could just read actual legal experts instead of the loons.

You mean like that whiny little Levin goober?

 

[OKTexas]

You've never sent ANYONE running for the hills, in your entire posting history. And calling me a "lying commie bitch" does not mean I am one. In fact, the only people who consistently claim others are lying, are themselves "liars".

If the only way you can "win" the argument is to lie about other people and call them names, it doesn't say much about your belief system, or your reasons for supporting a white nationalist government.

Your refusal to acknowledge the white nationalism which underpins the Party of Trump, show you to be in complete denial. They say it openly. They're not going to count "urban votes, or let non-whites vote.




No it is not. The point of Civil Rights lawsuits is to prevent the suppression of minority voters.

You keep posting Russian, Chinese and Iranian propaganda and lies - all of which Republicans are gleefully parroting as their own ideas.

Really, check out this thread, posts 245 & 246.

IN 2020, the CIA lied to the US Senate, saying that the Hunter Biden laptop story was "Russian disinformation"

The CIA knew this was false, but they lied to the US Senate and the American people to help Joe Biden get elected. This is what actual insurrection looks like. The highest officials within the CIA were aware of the statement prior to its publication. CIA’s Chief Operating Officer (COO)...

www.usmessageboard.com

.

 

[Billiejeens]

Let's see. Should I accept the evaluation of the best legal authorities, or go with the word of some anonymous idiot on the internet? I'll consider that choice and get back with you.

My apologies
I forget that you can't read.
Just go with whatever that maddow guy tells you.

 

[Billiejeens]

by contrast, when prosecutors have sought evidence from the President, the Court has consistently rejected Presidential claims of absolute immunity.

During the treason trial of former Vice President Aaron Burr, for instance, Chief Justice Marshall rejected President Thomas Jefferson’s claim that the President could not be subjected to a subpoena. Marshall simultaneously recognized, however, the existence of a “privilege” to withhold certain “official paper.” United States v. Burr, 25 F. Cas. 187, 192 (No. 14,694) (CC Va.).

And when a subpoena issued to President Richard Nixon, the Court rejected his claim of “absolute privilege.” United States v. Nixon, 418 U. S. 683, 703. But recognizing “the public interest in candid, objective, and even blunt or harsh opinions in Presidential decision making,” it held that a “presumptive privilege” protects Presidential communications. Id., at 708.

Because that privilege “relates to the effective discharge of a President’s powers,” id., at 711, the Court deemed it “fundamental to the operation of Government and inextricably rooted in the separation of powers under the Constitution.” Id., at 708. Pp. 9–12

 

[OKTexas]

5 women sue Texas over abortion bans, saying their lives were put at risk.

Five women are suing Texas, saying they were denied life-saving care and their health was put at risk, due to the state's strict abortion bans.

abcnews.go.com

This is the tragedy of people like you. You don't let such a thing as not being informed stop you from claiming things with great certainty.

They weren't denied anything by the State, did you read your own damn link? Try again ignorant ass. BTW it was all as coordinated stunt.

.

 

[scruffy]

First, I'm not advocating for any harm to come to trump, or any of his supporters, but in the light of the recent Supreme court ruling, serious uncomfortable questions present themselves. A reasonable person might believe trumps threats to seek revenge on his opponents, as well as his offer to trade environmental protections for a billion dollars present a threat to the constitution and the wellbeing of the country. Having sworn to protect and defend the constitution, and in light of the new presidential authority, it is Biden's duty to prevent any chance of trump winning the upcoming presidential election in any way his newfound authority allows. Should Biden, exercise his newfound authority by imprisoning trump in Guantanamo, or some other way? If congress opposes such actions, they can always impeach him if they can get enough of our representatives to find him guilty.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/07/01/trump-immunity-scotus-decision-full-text-pdf/

No.

Leftards need to STAND DOWN.

Any aggressive moves by leftards at this point will be perceived as hostile and destructive.

America is speaking right now. America wants the convicted felon. Because he is BETTER than anything the leftards have to offer.

America sees through the bullshit from the left. Including THIS ^^^ stupid bullshit.

Yes, some leftards will be incarcerated. Because they richly deserve it. All we:ve gotten from the leftist asswipes who promised to unite the country, is DESTRUCTION. They tear down statues in an effort to destroy history, they sit down on freeways so people can't get to work, they piss away working class tax money on ILLEGAL aliens, many of whom are vicious criminals and some of whom are even outright terrorists.

America has HAD ENOUGH of leftards. Any attempt to infringe on this election will be seen as an overt effort to seize and retain power, against the will of the People. If that happens, a lot of leftards will get hurt.

Lefties had their chance, and they blew it. America is hip to the bullshit coming from the left. And America doesn't like it. Proof? The left is losing, BADLY, in every single swing state, and in every poll that matters. Lefties are bleeding votes, they're losing thousands of votes every single day. Because they don't want to listen, they're in total denial of the fact that America has HAD ENOUGH of their bullshit.

The cat's out of the bag, and it ain't going back in. And good luck catching it. This present cadre of leftard psychopaths is finished. The best thing lefties can do is stand down and live to fight another day. Because the alternative is much, much worse.

 

[Billiejeens]

No.

Leftards need to STAND DOWN.

Any aggressive moves by leftards at this point will be perceived as hostile and destructive.

America is speaking right now. America wants the convicted felon. Because he is BETTER than anything the leftards have to offer.

America sees through the bullshit from the left. Including THIS ^^^ stupid bullshit.

Yes, some leftards will be incarcerated. Because they richly deserve it. All we:ve gotten from the leftist asswipes who promised to unite the country, is DESTRUCTION. They tear down statues in an effort to destroy history, they sit down on freeways so people can't get to work, they piss away working class tax money on ILLEGAL aliens, many of whom are vicious criminals and some of whom are even outright terrorists.

America has HAD ENOUGH of leftards. Any attempt to infringe on this election will be seen as an overt effort to seize and retain power, against the will of the People. If that happens, a lot of leftards will get hurt.

Lefties had their chance, and they blew it. America is hip to the bullshit coming from the left. And America doesn't like it. Proof? The left is losing, BADLY, in every single swing state, and in every poll that matters. Lefties are bleeding votes, they're losing thousands of votes every single day. Because they don't want to listen, they're in total denial of the fact that America has HAD ENOUGH of their bullshit.

The cat's out of the bag, and it ain't going back in. And good luck catching it. This present cadre of leftard psychopaths is finished. The best thing lefties can do is stand down and live to fight another day. Because the alternative is much, much worse.

He's not actually a felon.

That was not a real trial.

 

[OKTexas]

One Texas woman with an ectopic nonviable pregnancy went to court and got an Order to allow her doctor to perform an abortion and Ken Paxton threatened to prosecute the doctor and the hospital if they performed the abortion. She had to go out of state.

‘Stunning’ threat in Texas abortion case steps up Paxton criminalization crusade

State attorney general threatened to prosecute doctors if they provided abortion care to a woman with a nonviable pregnancy

www.theguardian.com

There is a pregnant woman being kept on life support so her baby can gestate. That's happening now in Texas, as I write this. If the woman receives immediate care and placed on life support before she stops breathing on her own, so there is no interruption to the oxygen supply, there are cases of women being 14 weeks pregnant when they suffered a stroke and were pronounced brain dead, and delivering a healthy baby more than 110 days later.

Women all over the USA are their states over THEIR right to life saving abortions in the case of pregnancy complications. 1 in every 50 US pregnancy is an ectopic pregnancy which is 100% non-viable, and continuing the pregnancy risks the life of the mother because when, not if, her tube bursts, which can never be predicted, she has 10 minutes to get to surgery.

Even Texas women admitted to hospital to await the moment when that happens, have nearly died, because the fetal heart kept beating while the woman bled out, and they couldn't help her until it stopped. She still doesn't know if she can have another baby.

These stories are horrific. 300% increase in pregnancy related deaths for women in states with abortion bans. 13% increase in infant mortality in Texas as women are forced to carry non-viable pregnancies to term, and watch their babies die in their arm, due to missing organs, or developmental issues.

80% of the women dying in the USA from pregnancy complication could be saved. That's beyond criminal, and speaks to hatred and misogyny which is at the core of Republicans treatment of women.

CDC Newsroom

Press releases, advisories, telebriefings, transcripts and archives.

www.cdc.gov

Pure commie propaganda from almost 2 years ago. And she got the headlines she wanted. Also the TX Supreme Court affirmed she was eligible for treatment under TX law.

.

 

[john doe 101]

Which one?

Exactly. So many to choose from.