|
Nicholas Wallace@wallace.bsky.social |
Absolutely wild that the court accuses the dissent of "fearmongering" with "extreme hypotheticals" when the actual basis for the indictment is a coup attempt that led to an attack on the capitol
43 replies 721 reposts 2265 likes
|
Dabin Reece
@dabinreece.bsky.social
[ View ] |
The same fearmongering with extreme hypotheticals that caused them to throw out the Colorado ballot case in about ten seconds?
0 replies 0 reposts 3 likes
|
Tauss🔜AC
@yote.gay
[ View ] |
It's always an "extreme hypothetical" until it's suddenly not.
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
@conantheyossarian.bsky.social
[ View ] |
www.c-span.org/video/?50767...
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Amiable Quinn
@amiablequinn.bsky.social
[ View ] |
If the President ordered all Red haired citizens to be incarnated, that's completely fine I guess.
1 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
Décervelage
@decervelage.bsky.social
[ View ] |
It makes a lot more sense when one realizes that at least one Justice’s wife took part in the planning and transport for this coup attempt. Two of them probably have a paper trail for this failed revolt on their credit card receipts.
0 replies 2 reposts 22 likes
|
Ned
@thewesterhazys.bsky.social
[ View ] |
That was a wonderful sight to them.
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
@mcmjolnir.bsky.social
[ View ] |
It's not hypothetical!
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Matias
@mkap.bsky.social
[ View ] |
oh come on
0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
Buchman
@buchman.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Also, the side the court agreed with agreed with those hypotheticals during argument.
0 replies 1 reposts 8 likes
|
Adam Vann
@adamvann.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Some small corner of my brain that recalls my law school idealism has tried to at least give the "middle three" justices a shred of credit and legitimacy. But I honestly don't see how that passage could possibly be anything other than an intentional pro-Trump troll
0 replies 0 reposts 11 likes
|
Els Jones🖤🤍💜🩶
@elsjones.bsky.social
[ View ] |
...what did they think Jan 6th was? a fun friendly bbq?
0 replies 0 reposts 7 likes
|
@noblehunter.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Just last week they struck down a law because fed prosecutors might hypothetically charge someone with bribery for accepting a ten dollar gift card
0 replies 3 reposts 12 likes
|
PJA
@pja.bsky.social
[ View ] |
We're all Susan Collins now
0 replies 0 reposts 13 likes
|
RawrTigerlily
@rawrtigerlily.bsky.social
[ View ] |
It makes perfect sense when you realize that fascism is basically malignant narcissism masquerading as a political party. The abuse and gaslighting everyone else is exactly the same coping mechanism.
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
JeannetteBlue
@jeannetteblue.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Maybe they were on a gratuity-all-expenses-paid vacation that week and didn’t know it happened.
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
|
@waterloo45.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Lock up the Court
0 replies 0 reposts 2 likes
|
VanVelding
@vanvelding.bsky.social
[ View ] |
An extreme hypothetical in which a president violates federal law has got to be trolling, right!? He did that shit!
0 replies 0 reposts 2 likes
|
votenanocratic
@votenanocratic.bsky.social
[ View ] |
My actual horror scenario is what if they are actually just that white-bread naive and think they're the ones seeing the world clearly. "The evil people are winning" is just like... yeah.
1 replies 0 reposts 6 likes
|
Globulous Gutgurgle
@inmediasrage.bsky.social
[ View ] |
The Outback 6: No Rules. Just Right.
0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
Charlie O'Keefe
@charlieok.bsky.social
[ View ] |
It was my understanding that we were done with June
www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKAn...
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
@immanent.bsky.social
[ View ] |
law and order party, right here. you can tell by the lawlessness.
0 replies 0 reposts 2 likes
|
John Bracken
@johnnybdc.bsky.social
[ View ] |
supreme gaslighting
0 replies 0 reposts 6 likes
|
Potato Cat
@sappo7.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Among other things, this judgement also appears to authorize the executive drone striking all six of them and trump as a legally protected act. A gamble, albeit probably a safe one, that the administration won't roll those dice
1 replies 0 reposts 31 likes
|
Reid Rivenburgh
@reidrivenburgh.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Exactly right! They're the ones actually engaging in hypotheticals by thinking up scenarios where a righteous president needs to be protected from malicious prosecution.
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Brianomite 🧨
@brianomite.bsky.social
[ View ] |
If they charged him with insurrection you could then arrest the justices for giving aid and comfort, but they didnt
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Sherman Dorn
@shermandorn.com
[ View ] |
An attack on Congress. I hate the common description of its being an attack on a building, "the capitol," at best a synecdoche for the real target, Congress.
0 replies 0 reposts 2 likes
|
Norma Jane
@normajane.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Skeet of the morning!
0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
Living Erased
@livingerased.bsky.social
[ View ] |
A hypothetical FUTURE where he feels empowered to break the law? What about the ACTUAL PAST jesus
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Indighost / Lavender Spectre
@indighost.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Yeah unless biden himself takes drastic instant action to fix this we are fucked for 20+ years
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
@reddog2.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Projection
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
|
@bluebadger.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Did they rebut the hypotheticals by saying that none of those could be official acts? If not, seems like not fearmongering!
0 replies 1 reposts 19 likes
|
Tony Sladky
@unitedshoes.bsky.social
[ View ] |
They have a point: From an originalist point of view, the Constitution does not contain the words "call the governor of Georgia on the telephone to order him to rig the election" nor "go on Twitter and instigate a coup" so clearly the Founders were fine with both of those things /s
0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
@jurgenhissen.bsky.social
[ View ] |
.. and like the courts precedent matters any more, anyway.
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Pain_cakes
@sbirche.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Please tell me the court did NOT just tell the dissenting Justices to "calm down."
0 replies 1 reposts 4 likes
|
Ben Helford
@benzored.bsky.social
[ View ] |
The dissent introduces extreme hypotheticals, like what if the President told a fascist group to "stand by" and then told people to storm the Capitol, and watch delighted as a bunch of them attempted to hang his own vice president? Just fearmongering to think that would ever happen.
0 replies 1 reposts 16 likes
|
@mjk4mj.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Inciting violence against your VP, it's totes cool according to the Republicans on the Supreme Court. Pence didn't do the criminal thing that Trump wanted him to do, Trumped sicced his mob on him (also Trump's message to anyone who disobeys his criminal requests). www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022...
0 replies 0 reposts 4 likes
|
Benene
@akw.bsky.social
[ View ] |
they were literally building gallows on the lawn and shouting kill pence what more do these people need
0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
Curmudge1
@curmudge1.bsky.social
[ View ] |
NOW they want to follow precedent, but not for Roe.
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Tom Higgins
@interestedparty.bsky.social
[ View ] |
It's not hypothetical that Trump promised to be dictator for the first day of his second term.
0 replies 1 reposts 13 likes
|
|
Mr. Smith
@newscollector08.bsky.social
[ View ] |
The masks are off, not even hiding it anymore. The Supreme Court is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Republican party.
0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
@timbbq.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Your CNN. 😂😂😂
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
WasteLandRover
@wastelandrover.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Yeah, imagine this wild hypothetical of a president violating federal law. When would that ever happen? /sarcasm
0 replies 0 reposts 61 likes
|
Tortilla the Hun
@midnitet0ker.bsky.social
[ View ] |
America: The Comedy
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes