Reposted by Rick does Math and Stuff
Honestly still in shock that the most crooked American President in history said "I need immunity" and the GOP Supreme Court said "well, it's nowhere in the constitution, but sure, why not? Whats the worst that could happen?"
68 replies
506 reposts
2375 likes
The purpose of this law is to enable a Trump dictatorship. At that point all bets are off. Voting rights? Gone. Gerrymandering and disenfranchisement to keep Republicans in power.
People need to stop thinking power will pendulum back to Democrats. The goal is permanent, one-party minority rule.
0 replies
1 reposts
3 likes
It's literally a criminal act since the purpose is obstruction of justice. The inclusion of an otherwise atopical clause banning evidence is the tell. That has nothing to do with the case they were hearing. It's about killing the guilty verdict in New York. And it's without legal foundation.
0 replies
0 reposts
0 likes
"Complicit" feels insufficient. They are allies.
One day after the immunity ruling that fundamentally changes how America works, and the media only want to talk about how Biden should drop out.
1 replies
0 reposts
1 likes
Still waiting for the "Should Trump drop out?" questions.
In a sane world, that would be the expectation for candidate found guilty of several felonies. Not the utter bullshit the Republicans are trying to sell the nation on.
(BTW, it's not going to work.)
0 replies
0 reposts
1 likes
But they will. It's only a question of how and when and how much chaos will happen between now and then.
The only thing they know how to do is propaganda. They don't know how to run anything. It isn't an accident COVID happened on Trump's watch. (Or 9/11 on W's, for that matter.)
0 replies
0 reposts
1 likes
Maybe if these guys wanted to so radically rewrite the laws of this land, they should have campaigned on the changes they wanted, won elections, etc.
1 replies
0 reposts
6 likes
Heritage Foundation announced they will rewrite Constitution willy nilly and pretend they hold power legitimately.
0 replies
0 reposts
0 likes
Are they doing _any_ similar coverage of Trump's failing faculties? Or are they just admiring how he's cleverly dodging legal responsibility for his crimes?
0 replies
0 reposts
4 likes
What part of "he wants to be a dictator!" is so hard for people to understand?
- openly admires Putin and defends Russia's interests over NATO
- openly admires other authoritarian leaders
- idly muses about dictatorial powers
- wants protesters to be shot
- argues that he is above the law
1 replies
1 reposts
30 likes
How'd that work out for Clinton, who had a much stronger resume?
0 replies
0 reposts
0 likes
Caving never works in the long run for Democrats.
Betrayal is a bad look. Whoever told him to do this gave him bad advice.
0 replies
0 reposts
0 likes
Looking forward to that polling.
"Do you agree with the SCOTUS decision that grants Donald Trump immunity from criminal prosecution?"
They might slip it in some point in the next 25 push polls about Biden's age.
1 replies
0 reposts
7 likes
Of course the pundits had their reaction and ran with it. Not a surprise they're out of touch with the public. That's been true for a long time.
0 replies
0 reposts
2 likes
You expect Merchan to ignore the implications of the SCOTUS ruling?
What would that accomplish?
0 replies
0 reposts
0 likes
He was ripping off Harry S Truman when he said that. Let's not give him too much credit.
0 replies
0 reposts
5 likes
"Well, we tried."
They never did.
They ignore the problem, fail to present counter-arguments to the public, let the right-wing spew hate constantly, and then wonder why the left isn't winning.
Pointing at LePen and saying "Bad person!" doesn't accomplish anything. If it were only that easy!
0 replies
0 reposts
4 likes
Very early Harry had a better grip on relating to humans than JK seems to. Like, by S1, Ep 3.
0 replies
0 reposts
6 likes
1 - guy was freaked out when Rowling started spouting TERF bullshit? That sounds entirely probable to me.
That she failed to properly identify the source of his discomfort? Also likely.
That's she's terrible at reading people? I'm not surprised.
0 replies
0 reposts
12 likes
'The subject made him very uncomfortable.'
I would be uncomfortable if I were in a conversation with a woman I had presumed to be sane and rational and she started talking about "penised lesbians".
And it wouldn't be the topic. It would be the "Omigod she's bonkers" moment.
0 replies
0 reposts
3 likes
I suspect he meant it when he said it.
The problem is that Roberts, et al, are so deeply biased (and dumb) that they are giving credence to Trump's claim that the prosecutions are politically motivated and baseless.
They believe their own propaganda.
This is a "Save Trump!" Hail Mary.
0 replies
0 reposts
0 likes
Obligatory leopard, getting hungry for a face to eat.
0 replies
0 reposts
4 likes
Exactly.
0 replies
0 reposts
0 likes
It never made any sense for Obama to immediately cave on closing Gitmo. The first thing he did when getting the White House was to signal weakness. I'm sure that timidity emboldened Republicans and was part of why they chose to blockade Merrick Garland. They correctly thought he'd do nothing.
0 replies
0 reposts
6 likes
The Court rejected that argument and simply granted POTUS immunity.
1 replies
0 reposts
1 likes
The structural reason it doesn't matter is because SCOTUS would write some fancy language and invent new rules to block him.
SCOTUS is an active participant in national politics now.
0 replies
1 reposts
4 likes
Lol.
SCOTUS isn't going to let Biden get away with anything.
Do people think this is still a nation ruled buy laws alone? We're well into Calvinball now. Republicans do what they want and SCOTUS backs them up. That's the current reality.
0 replies
0 reposts
2 likes
Reposted by Rick does Math and Stuff
I don’t think it’s an exaggeration at all to say the decision threatens the Republic. I might not have said so in 2015, before I saw how triumphantly lawless and autocratic the President could be, and how so many people would applaud it or at least shrug.
42 replies
496 reposts
1690 likes
With regard to your former point:
a President _violated international law_ and greenlit a torture regime and not only was he not prosecuted for doing so, there wasn't even a criminal investigation.
The Presidency already had nearly imperial powers in many respects.
0 replies
0 reposts
2 likes
Reposted by Rick does Math and Stuff
THE sentence of the day: A Macronist incumbent in the Marseille region came in 3rd in her seat. She just dropped out to support the left. She said, about why she's maneuvering to block the far-right:
"Defeats happen, but you can never recover from dishonor."
18 replies
477 reposts
1600 likes
This is the choice a lot of Republicans have made in the past 8 years when they chose to let Trump say whatever he wanted, whenever he wanted, and they were never going to criticize him. They're just hoping he'll go away before they, personally, become targets.
0 replies
0 reposts
2 likes