07/01/2024
© Medias Touch 2024
Share this news from Ukraine Today .org:
- Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
- Share on X (Opens in new window) X
- Share on Pinterest (Opens in new window) Pinterest
- Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
- Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
- Share on Tumblr (Opens in new window) Tumblr
- Share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
- Share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
- Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
- Print (Opens in new window) Print
USA is screwed. Ukraine may be too. We keep hearing about the corruption in Russia, but if the Supreme Court can make a blatantly political decision, then corruption has seeped into the highest levels of government.
Just to inform you, which seems to be a characteristic lacking on your part, the Supreme Court is supposed to be non-political. Besides that, the decision included a request for more information and the vote was 6-3 so it was bipartisan.
No matter how you want to look at this, it still has HUGE ramifications.
It does. Its a fitting clarification that no president should be held liable for their official actions. That is correct. For example, Obama should not be arrested and held liable for using a drone to kill an American Terrorist.
That is complete nonsense, and a bad example. Presidents should not be able to commit what ever crimes they want and declare it an official act. Yes they are commander in chief, and leading part in executive branch, however they still need to be accountable to the people and have checks and balances applied.
I suggest you read the majority opinion Sir Bill, its only 90 pages. 😉
Don’t think I won’t Sir RSM.
Your referral to the vote being “bipartisan” already implies improper bias.
Well, perhaps nonpartisan is a better description but the end result is the same. Bias assumes one side or the other, not both sides.
Bias:
“prejudice in favor of or against one … group compared with another”
He’s got immunity for official acts, not private ones.
The title is misleading. He got partial immunity, for official acts, and not for private ones.
They were saying the absolute Immunity applied to official acts.
Right you are, Sir Bill. I wrote my comment wrong.
Just like all previous presidents, yes.
I wish good luck to the lower courts in deciding what is private or official, while the president’s official action is itself permanent, unless the president is on his toilet or playing golf. The criminal acts alleged against Trump take place in his official presidential action, during moments in the institutional life of the US.
This judgment allows a president to do everything… Eliminate adversaries, defraud, deal state secrets. Immunity!
It is the return to monarchical life where the king, who is supposed to defend the constitution against all external enemies, decides everything and has the right to do everything.
So then does Trump administration’s confiscation and destruction of notes taken at Trump’s meeting with pootin in Helsinki constitute an official act? Does it then even matter the laws that require archiving these interactions?
Just like all previous presidents, yes.
Previous Presidents have NOT had absolute Immunity for official act if crimes were committed.
What Presidents had before this was immunity from civil liability not criminal. Or Watergate wouldn’t have forced Nixon to resign, and Clinton would not have had all the stuff with Monica aired in public.
Records law violations:
https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/news/foia/2019-05-07/white-house-failure-document-heads-state-meetings-violates-records-law
Biden on SCOTUS ruling: starts time mark 0:46
Trump’s post response to SCOTUS decision.
“The Supreme Court totally dismantled most of the charges against me. Joe Biden should now call off his ‘dogs’. Our Country should now be focused on GREATNESS again!”
The Federalist Society is a CULT.
Great…so we have cults in the judicial branch too. Ugh🙄