Supreme Court rules President is immune for “official acts”

[Patented Phil 1,469]

7 hours ago, Fnord said:

3. This statement is a right wing fever dream. Stop it. It's a lie. This is not something real people support and the tiny fraction of people that do can fuk off.

I stopped reading after this. You are wrong about this, and you know it.  The Women's Health Protection Act of 2022 was voted on by every single Democrat in Congress except one.  It allowed unfettered access to abortion as long as "the life or health" of the mother was at risk.  In these pro-abortion laws health of the mother includes mental health.  So yeah, this was basically an abortion on demand law up until birth.  But you knew this already.  It's been discussed in here several times.  You leftists are lying sacks of shitt on the abortion issue.

[thegeneral 2,889]

Just now, RLLD said:

Maybe we instead wait.....we have seen how long it can take for folks to.......amend their earlier position on what the guy said....

It’s a video of him speaking  

[RLLD 4,143]

Just now, thegeneral said:

It’s a video of him speaking  

Correct....we have had those in the past.   Perhaps all the lying about him, that is later recanted, dilutes your position just a smidge.....the consequences of doing that.....

[thegeneral 2,889]

Just now, RLLD said:

Correct....we have had those in the past.   Perhaps all the lying about him, that is later recanted, dilutes your position just a smidge.....the consequences of doing that.....

You are too much

[RLLD 4,143]

14 minutes ago, thegeneral said:

You are too much

Thanks, I often see your positions as sorta cute.....

[RLLD 4,143]

Manhattan Prosecutors Agree to Delay Trump’s Sentencing

Quote

Manhattan prosecutors on Tuesday agreed with Donald J. Trump’s request to postpone his criminal sentencing so that the judge overseeing the case could weigh whether a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling might imperil his conviction, new court filings show.

 

So it appears as though Smith submarined their best chance at potentially taking down a political opponent and interfering in the election.

While this was the proper "legal" thing to do, I am really surprised they did it.....

[GutterBoy 2,898]

52 minutes ago, cyclone24 said:

So you’re doubling down on the bogeyman. OK got it. Not necessarily you but sometimes I’m surprised you guys make it through a full day.

It's not a boogeyman, Trump has said this stuff before, and his lawyers argued for it.

 

 

[MLCKAA 540]

Disclaimer:  I def have not read this whole thread

Why wouldn’t we want the president to have immunity for official acts of office?  That seems like a given.  I think people are overreacting to this.  Take Trump’s recent hush money convictions as an example.  That’s not an official act of office in any way.  I see he plans on trying to get that overturned on the basis of this Supreme Court ruling, but I doubt that happens.  That’s something he did that had nothing to do with acting on behalf of America.

[GutterBoy 2,898]

 

Aged like milk

[TheNewGirl 1,342]

5 minutes ago, MLCKAA said:

Disclaimer:  I def have not read this whole thread

Why wouldn’t we want the president to have immunity for official acts of office?  That seems like a given.  I think people are overreacting to this.  Take Trump’s recent hush money convictions as an example.  That’s not an official act of office in any way.  I see he plans on trying to get that overturned on the basis of this Supreme Court ruling, but I doubt that happens.  That’s something he did that had nothing to do with acting on behalf of America.

People are only upset now because it's Trump and can/will have an effect on things going on now with him. If it were about Biden or another on their "side" , they'd be singing a different tune. 

[GutterBoy 2,898]

14 minutes ago, TheNewGirl said:

People are only upset now because it's Trump and can/will have an effect on things going on now with him. If it were about Biden or another on their "side" , they'd be singing a different tune. 

Nope.  If Biden announced today that he's ordered Trump assassination as a matter of national security, I and almost all of us would be just as upset.

[Patented Phil 1,469]

So much winning…

I can’t stand it!  Please, Trump - stop with all the winning!

I can’t take it anymore!

[seafoam1 2,799]

6 minutes ago, Patented Phil said:

So much winning…

I can’t stand it!  Please, Trump - stop with all the winning!

I can’t take it anymore!

Poor liberals....

[Fnord 2,051]

1 hour ago, Patented Phil said:

I stopped reading after this. You are wrong about this, and you know it.  The Women's Health Protection Act of 2022 was voted on by every single Democrat in Congress except one.  It allowed unfettered access to abortion as long as "the life or health" of the mother was at risk.  In these pro-abortion laws health of the mother includes mental health.  So yeah, this was basically an abortion on demand law up until birth.  But you knew this already.  It's been discussed in here several times.  You leftists are lying sacks of shitt on the abortion issue.

Sure, you quit reading. How fortuitous for you. Now you, like @RLLD, can just avoid answering inconvenient questions like cowards.

If Trump wins in November, you guys are about two years away from being okay with Emperor Trump doing whatever the hell he wants. You'll defend it, no matter what it is. Most of you already do, if we're being honest. You couldn't even respond when I asked you if you'd be okay executing fellow Americans. @Maximum Overkill just quoted me and said nothing, giving the impression he was on board. 

But we're all just being alarmists, right? No way you guys actually mean what you say... 

 

[RLLD 4,143]

Just now, Fnord said:

Sure, you quit reading. Hoq fortuitous for you. Now you, like @RLLD, can just avoid answering inconvenient questions like cowards.

If Trump wins in November, you guys are about two years away from being okay with Emperor Trump doing whatever the hell he wants. You'll defend it, no matter what it is. Most of you already do, if we're being honest. You couldn't even respond when I asked you if you'd be okay executing fellow Americans. @Maximum Overkill just quoted me and said nothing, giving the impression he was on board. 

But we're all just being alarmists, right? No way you guys actually mean what you say... 

 

And this is how some will behave when you stand up to them.  

[Fnord 2,051]

Just now, RLLD said:

And this is how some will behave when you stand up to them.  

Did I miss you answering some questions? You haven't stood up for shlt. Well, other than Trump. You'll defend him eternally, no matter what.

[The Real timschochet 6,402]

55 minutes ago, TheNewGirl said:

People are only upset now because it's Trump and can/will have an effect on things going on now with him. If it were about Biden or another on their "side" , they'd be singing a different tune. 

I made this point earlier- but it’s also equally true for many of those who are cheering the decision.

Ive had a day to think about this decision and I remain troubled by it. I think it gives too much power to the President, any President. I think that we should have trusted our legal system, that if there had been an unfair prosecution, a jury of 12 citizens would have given a quick and easy acquittal. I think that there are times in which a President can commit crimes that are also official acts and that we need to have the option to prosecute those crimes. 
 

Thats where I stand as of now. Good arguments can always change my mind.  

[Fnord 2,051]

1 minute ago, The Real timschochet said:

I made this point earlier- but it’s also equally true for many of those who are cheering the decision.

Ive had a day to think about this decision and I remain troubled by it. I think it gives too much power to the President, any President. I think that we should have trusted our legal system, that if there had been an unfair prosecution, a jury of 12 citizens would have given a quick and easy acquittal. I think that there are times in which a President can commit crimes that are also official acts and that we need to have the option to prosecute those crimes. 
 

Thats where I stand as of now. Good arguments can always change my mind.  

You've already heard the arguments. They won't get any more compelling, unless Biden decides to test the limits of their meaning by going aggro before getting drummed out in November. Having resigned myself to another four years of toxic Trumpisms, part of me sorta hopes he does. But he won't. 

[Jose M 125]

TILT!

 

[Patented Phil 1,469]

19 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

I made this point earlier- but it’s also equally true for many of those who are cheering the decision.

Ive had a day to think about this decision and I remain troubled by it. I think it gives too much power to the President, any President. I think that we should have trusted our legal system, that if there had been an unfair prosecution, a jury of 12 citizens would have given a quick and easy acquittal. I think that there are times in which a President can commit crimes that are also official acts and that we need to have the option to prosecute those crimes. 
 

Thats where I stand as of now. Good arguments can always change my mind.  

Cool.  That could be fun.  We can start by bringing Biden up on charges of not enforcing immigration law and endangering our citizens.

This idea of governmental immunity is not a new thing that was just created by an imperial court.  Stop listening to the Liberal nonsense and use your head.

[MLCKAA 540]

1 hour ago, GutterBoy said:

Nope.  If Biden announced today that he's ordered Trump assassination as a matter of national security, I and almost all of us would be just as upset.

But these hypotheticals are so outrageous that I can’t take the argument seriously.  I mean no offense to you— you’re not the only person saying stuff like this.  This is what’s known as a thought-terminating argument.

[RLLD 4,143]

42 minutes ago, Fnord said:

Did I miss you answering some questions? You haven't stood up for shlt. Well, other than Trump. You'll defend him eternally, no matter what.

You seem upset

[cyclone24 1,912]

1 hour ago, GutterBoy said:

 

Aged like milk

Yeah, he can’t go out and murder a hooker. What they are saying is you’re not gonna prosecute him on witch hunts and presidential decisions. 
 

The courts aren’t letting him get away with anything they are saying stop bringing up these nonsensical politically driven litigations against a political opponent You don’t like. One might almost call that Nazi level behavior..gasp!!

My God you guys act like he’s going to use his kids to take money to get access to the president for bribes or something.

[jerryskids 6,557]

7 hours ago, GutterBoy said:

I love how you think you're smarter or better than the uneducated minions that you stand with and parrot the same bullsh1t that you're all told.

But to your credit you take it a step further.  I've had many conversations with election deniers like yourself, and it always goes the same way, which is basically "show me your work" and that's where it ends since they can't.  You've taken it a step further and now claim that it's impossible to show your work because the "system" won't allow it.  So not only was the election rigged, but the ability to catch the rigging was also rigged.  How convenient.  It's a good tactic to protect yourself.

If you are an engineer and possess an analytical mind, then your natural inclination is the CER method, claim evidence reasoning.  You've made your claim but have no evidence so your reasoning is missing.  Instead of adjusting your claim you're just saying it's impossible to get evidence lol.  It's a convenient, lazy excuse.

And it's not GIGO, something I understand having worked in software for 30 years.  There is nothing inherently wrong with our election process, paper ballots or drop boxes.  And it was never a problem until trump cried that he lost.  Every recount, audit, study, analysis has shown zero evidence of fraud.  Grown adults need to accept that.

I see that @WhiteWonderhas picked up the torch in my absence, but I wanted to add a few things.

What systems engineering experts am I parroting?  Do you hear my arguments from lots of other people?  To my knowledge I'm not parroting anyone.  You, on the other hand, are following your overlords with "ELECTION DENIER$#@!" When met with anything that challenges your simplistic belief -- we've done paper ballots before, therefore mailing millions of ballots in places which have never done it, to addresses which aren't recently vetted, and adding a bunch of unmonitored drop boxes is exactly the same! -- shows a childlike inability to analyze things.

BTW, my daughter who moved to NY last summer?  Yeah, she just got called for a federal grand jury... in Phoenix.  She changed her address and voter registration 9 months ago, but somehow it didn't make it through to the fed system.  Imagine that.

Anyway, back to systems... I spent the bulk of my career primarily in the verification side of engineering and engineering sales.  A significant amount more effort goes into verifying a complex system or electronic component than into the design of it.  And much of the "design" is putting hooks into the design to make it easier/possible to verify.  You see, if not done correctly, there are often parts of such components/systems which literally cannot be verified.  

If you've had any exposure to complex software systems, you know this.

As an example, let's take the changes for 2020 election.  How complex was it to print ballots for the people in the system, mail them to the addresses, and put up drop boxes?  Not very.  How complex would it be to verify that the people in that system were still at those addresses, still alive, etc.?  Much more difficult.  

Some states, AZ included, have an absentee ballot system which has been in place for a long time (I take advantage of it).  So I am not questioning the ability to have such a system, but rather stating that adding a heretofore new, unverified process in a bunch of areas increases the risk of fraud.  And to say such a system is the "most secure election ever" is categorically, undeniably wrong.

But hey, let's use your CER method (I've never heard that acronym BTW):

Claim:  The 2020 election process increased the risk for fraud.

Evidence:  See above.

Reasoning:  They didn't have time to verify the new processes.

I'll end by going full circle to the ELECTION DENIER$#@! shtick.  I have never stated that the election was stolen.  Regarding the voting, I've only stated variations of the above.  And I bring it up when there are claims of "most bestest election ever!"  That being said, I have stated that I do think Big Tech worked with the Feds to suppress pro-Trump / anti-Biden materials like the laptop, for instance.  That's more influence than cheating, though. 

Whether you realize it or not, you've been programmed to insta-shut down any argument like mine in this thread with a shout of ELECTION DENIER$#@!  Which makes it hard to have an intelligent conversation about it.

[WhiteWonder 2,675]

8 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

I see that @WhiteWonderhas picked up the torch in my absence, but I wanted to add a few things.\

Jerry bringing the heat and rational posts, as always. 

[GutterBoy 2,898]

19 minutes ago, cyclone24 said:

My God you guys act like he’s going to use his kids to take money to get access to the president for bribes or something.

Lik2 $2B in Saudi money for Ivanka?

[seafoam1 2,799]

Just now, GutterBoy said:

Lik2 $2B in Saudi money for Ivanka?

That could have started to fix the damage caused by the liberal riots of 2020.

[Beaker15 233]

1 hour ago, The Real timschochet said:

I made this point earlier- but it’s also equally true for many of those who are cheering the decision.

Ive had a day to think about this decision and I remain troubled by it. I think it gives too much power to the President, any President. I think that we should have trusted our legal system, that if there had been an unfair prosecution, a jury of 12 citizens would have given a quick and easy acquittal. I think that there are times in which a President can commit crimes that are also official acts and that we need to have the option to prosecute those crimes. 
 

Thats where I stand as of now. Good arguments can always change my mind.  

Look no further than the recent New York trial that convicted Trump.  When you have a bias judge and 12 jurors from a district that leans heavily in one direction you get a conviction like this that should never have seen the light of day and will easily be appealed.  Political theater and a direct result of going after your political enemy and weaponizing the justice system.

[Jose M 125]

 

 

[GutterBoy 2,898]

25 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

I see that @WhiteWonderhas picked up the torch in my absence, but I wanted to add a few things.

What systems engineering experts am I parroting?  Do you hear my arguments from lots of other people?  To my knowledge I'm not parroting anyone.  You, on the other hand, are following your overlords with "ELECTION DENIER$#@!" When met with anything that challenges your simplistic belief -- we've done paper ballots before, therefore mailing millions of ballots in places which have never done it, to addresses which aren't recently vetted, and adding a bunch of unmonitored drop boxes is exactly the same! -- shows a childlike inability to analyze things.

BTW, my daughter who moved to NY last summer?  Yeah, she just got called for a federal grand jury... in Phoenix.  She changed her address and voter registration 9 months ago, but somehow it didn't make it through to the fed system.  Imagine that.

Anyway, back to systems... I spent the bulk of my career primarily in the verification side of engineering and engineering sales.  A significant amount more effort goes into verifying a complex system or electronic component than into the design of it.  And much of the "design" is putting hooks into the design to make it easier/possible to verify.  You see, if not done correctly, there are often parts of such components/systems which literally cannot be verified.  

If you've had any exposure to complex software systems, you know this.

As an example, let's take the changes for 2020 election.  How complex was it to print ballots for the people in the system, mail them to the addresses, and put up drop boxes?  Not very.  How complex would it be to verify that the people in that system were still at those addresses, still alive, etc.?  Much more difficult.  

Some states, AZ included, have an absentee ballot system which has been in place for a long time (I take advantage of it).  So I am not questioning the ability to have such a system, but rather stating that adding a heretofore new, unverified process in a bunch of areas increases the risk of fraud.  And to say such a system is the "most secure election ever" is categorically, undeniably wrong.

But hey, let's use your CER method (I've never heard that acronym BTW):

Claim:  The 2020 election process increased the risk for fraud.

Evidence:  See above.

Reasoning:  They didn't have time to verify the new processes.

I'll end by going full circle to the ELECTION DENIER$#@! shtick.  I have never stated that the election was stolen.  Regarding the voting, I've only stated variations of the above.  And I bring it up when there are claims of "most bestest election ever!"  That being said, I have stated that I do think Big Tech worked with the Feds to suppress pro-Trump / anti-Biden materials like the laptop, for instance.  That's more influence than cheating, though. 

Whether you realize it or not, you've been programmed to insta-shut down any argument like mine in this thread with a shout of ELECTION DENIER$#@!  Which makes it hard to have an intelligent conversation about it.

Well nice to see you're pivoting to the election was not stolen.  It is hard to have an intelligent conversation with anyone that thinks the election was stolen give that the evidence doesn't support that claim.  The reaction I always get is "Well I still think it was stolen", which is nonsensical.

For the record, I don't think the 2020 election was the most secure election ever.  The Russians had greater influence than Big Tech in peddling pro-Trump anti-Hillary propaganda in 2016.  You were confused, I said you were parroting the maga election deniers, but you've since backpedaled on that so good job.

[WhiteWonder 2,675]

3 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

The Russians had greater influence than Big Tech in peddling pro-Trump anti-Hillary propaganda in 2016. 

[GutterBoy 2,898]

2 minutes ago, WhiteWonder said:

Why is this funny to you?  Do you not know about the Russian influence in 2016?

[Hardcore troubadour 14,919]

5 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

Why is this funny to you?  Do you not know about the Russian influence in 2016?

Were you influenced? 

[seafoam1 2,799]

9 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

Why is this funny to you?  Do you not know about the Russian influence in 2016?

[Fnord 2,051]

23 minutes ago, Beaker15 said:

Look no further than the recent New York trial that convicted Trump.  When you have a bias judge and 12 jurors from a district that leans heavily in one direction you get a conviction like this that should never have seen the light of day and will easily be appealed.  Political theater and a direct result of going after your political enemy and weaponizing the justice system.

Further evidence that what Trump does or doesn't do matters little to those supporting him. Now the whole system is corrupt and guilty verdicts are meaningless. From now on, it will always be like this. Evidence doesn't matter, courts don't matter, laws don't matter.

Why was this never an issue until Trump? Were Obama and W charged with war crimes and I missed it? Precious Trump gets rung up and found guilty of a felony, so obviously presidents MUST have immunity. This is profoundly un-American. 

[jerryskids 6,557]

7 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

Well nice to see you're pivoting to the election was not stolen.  It is hard to have an intelligent conversation with anyone that thinks the election was stolen give that the evidence doesn't support that claim.  The reaction I always get is "Well I still think it was stolen", which is nonsensical.

For the record, I don't think the 2020 election was the most secure election ever.  The Russians had greater influence than Big Tech in peddling pro-Trump anti-Hillary propaganda in 2016.  You were confused, I said you were parroting the maga election deniers, but you've since backpedaled on that so good job.

I did not pivoting or backpedaling, go back and reread.  Here, I'll help you:

I stated that the system did not provide the ability to have evidence, which has been my point all along.  And  you responded like the good programmed simp Leftie you are with RIGGED!  WAAAAA!, trying to shut down any attempt to question the security of the election.

Now get your shine box.

[WhiteWonder 2,675]

14 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

Why is this funny to you?  Do you not know about the Russian influence in 2016?

correct, I had no idea about 2016... I didn't even mention it at all in an earlier post of mine that YOU quoted. Shows how much you actually read before formulating your responses to people.

but I am not at all surprised you can't figure out why I laughed.  

[GutterBoy 2,898]

1 minute ago, jerryskids said:

I did not pivoting or backpedaling, go back and reread.  Here, I'll help you:

I stated that the system did not provide the ability to have evidence, which has been my point all along.  And  you responded like the good programmed simp Leftie you are with RIGGED!  WAAAAA!, trying to shut down any attempt to question the security of the election.

Now get your shine box.

ok Rusty

Your whole premise is BS, the system did not provide the ability to have evidence, it's a dumb point.  If there are millions of fake ballots, they won't be found upon audit or recount?  Ballots for dead people, again audit, recount?  Duplicate ballots?  There is no way to tell any of this happened?  STFU.

And why even bring up this dumb idea if you don't think the election was stolen?  Are you that bored?

[GutterBoy 2,898]

1 minute ago, WhiteWonder said:

correct, I had no idea about 2016... I didn't even mention it at all in an earlier post of mine that YOU quoted. Shows how much you actually read before formulating your responses to people.

but I am not at all surprised you can't figure out why I laughed.  

If you have no idea about Russian influence in 2016 then maybe you should educate yourself.  I didn't care that you never brought it up, it wasn't a reply to you, it was a reply to Jerry who brought up influence.

I know why you laughed, you think it's made up because you hear trump say Russia Russia Russia but it happened.  Learn something.

[Hardcore troubadour 14,919]

Gutterboy decided on who to vote for in 2016 based on 180k worth of facebook ads.  Lol.