Post

Avatar
1/ Let me explain one way that today's Trump immunity decision threatens the survival of the Republic. Under today's ruling, a President would be immune for any way in which he used the military (a "core function"), even to kill American citizens in America. Theoretically, the soldiers who . . .
Avatar
2/ . . . carried out such illegal orders would be subject to criminal prosecution, even if the President was not. BUT (HUGE BUT) the President has an absolute and unreviewable power to pardon anyone for federal crimes. So, he could promise all soldiers that (a) if they carry out the illegal . . .
Avatar
3/ . . . order to murder their fellow Americans, they will be pardoned and (b) if the refuse to carry out the illegal order, they will be subjected to the same violence that they refuse to carry out on others. A President could set up "political troops" to force soldiers into battle, in the . .
Avatar
4/4 . . . same way that the Soviets used political troops to execute tens of thousands of soldiers who refused orders during World War II. According to Chief Justice Roberts and his cabal, there is not a thing that anyone could ever do to bring that President to justice. For shame.
Avatar
We need to have swift, strong, loud push back well before the election. It is still relatively safe now. It won't be if he's reelected.
Avatar
The people who should have done that through all the other things he did either chose not to do so or were purged and now marked for reprisal. All that’s left is the voters.
Avatar
You are ignoring all the people who held impeachment hearings. It mattered, even if the GOP Senate didn't convict. It showed us who they were. Over half of Congress voted to impeach. You are ignoring the January 6 committee. They worked hard. The voters need to see the fight.
Avatar
The Republicans who voted to impeach and participated in the Jan 6 committee have been ousted and nominated for reprisal. Until voters throw them out, the Trumpists are in control of all the bodies with the power to push back apart from the presidency.
Avatar
And being in office isn't the only way to exercise one's voice. Adam Kinsinger and Liz Cheney have power, even if it isn't in an elected role. But we shouldn't just roll over and make it easy for fascists. It will get harder to fight back the longer we wait.
Avatar
Are you including the Senate?
Avatar
We need the pandemic level of protest for this… and everyone is too weary.
Avatar
But I guess all the puffery about Second Amendment keeping us safe from tyranny applies only when Democrats suggest that everyone should have health care.
Avatar
In theory, the murderous troops could be prosecuted at the state level. But, of course, POTUS could simply target any state prosecutors and judges who are willing to bring and maintain those state charges.
Avatar
Scope of duties would get it moved to federal court.
Avatar
You can't remove state criminal prosecutions to federal court. The officers could try bringing a collateral federal case to enjoin the state prosecutors or courts, though it wouldn't succeed under current federal law.
Avatar
Federal officials sued for actions performed in the scope of their official duties don't have their cases removed to federal court?
Avatar
In civil cases seeking damages or injunctions where federal jurisdiction could have existed? Yes, those can be removed. In state criminal prosecutions brought because the official acts violate state criminal laws? No. There is simply no mechanism in federal law to do so.
Avatar
“You can’t”, but the President could because he’d just insist they do it regardless of legality, under threat of violence. He can’t be prosecuted and everybody else involved gets pardons. As far as I can tell, this fucks the entire system of government 100% completely. Please tell me I’m wrong?
Avatar
Well, yeah, that was my point further up. We can't really debate procedural or substantive legalities if POTUS can play the "I will just ignore any law I like because I'm immune and threaten everyone else into going along with it" card.
Avatar
Avatar
So theoretically a President could use the military to assassinate elected and appointed officials (legislative and judicial, federal and state) to pave the way to unfettered authoritarianism?
Avatar
Or, ironically, to save the country from the very leaders that seek to destroy it. But Biden would never.
Avatar
I am horrified by all of this. But why arenʻt we now full of suggestions for how Biden can use his newfound powers to fix this?
Avatar
With all her many terrible flaws, I love what America *could* be at her best, and never wish to see political violence. Were that horror to come upon us, I seriously wonder how long before the fragging that checked commanders in Vietnam would start among US based forces.
Avatar
Nah, there is always somebody listening, & willing to snitch; that’s how the communists kept a tight grip on power! This will decimate the command chain & the ranks! It’s best to prevent it, before it becomes reality! VOTE BLUE ALL DOWN BALLOT! 🔥
Avatar
What’s worse, snitching is rewarded, & encouraged, but it will be used to get rid of innocent ppl too, if it’s convenient! There will be no justice!
Avatar
If I was a Supreme Court justice, I’d think twice about leaving the country. Core presidential powers and all.
Avatar
I give you credit for thinking creatively and not just going to assassinations.
Avatar
Hard to see assassination on US soil being part of core powers. CIA abductions abroad? 100% A OK!
Avatar
You're forgetting the pardon power loop hole! 😭
Avatar
Not really. He’d make up some flimsy bullshit about national security. Doesn’t need to stand up to any actual scrutiny with the GOP and courts backing him.
Avatar
Essentially, the justices are counting on Biden being too decent to send the military against them?
Avatar
This seems real bad, Mitch. :(
Avatar
I think soldiers carrying out illegal presidential orders would have a strong argument that they too are immune even without a pardon. Since courts cannot review Article II orders, neither can soldiers.
Avatar
Does the decision today mean the president can simply ignore federal courts? Could lead to interesting results.
Avatar
I think that the right wing whackos on SCOTUS think that Impeachment is the proper remedy. Which, until like 2010 I might have agreed with, when the GOP still had some shame.
Avatar
And his corrupt reason for pardoning is not now questionable, correct? Because pardoning is an official act.
Avatar
That, at least, isn’t new. The Supreme Court has long held that they basically can’t second-guess any part of a pardon.
Avatar
I thought I read it couldn't be dangled in advance in return for certain actions? (I'm definitely not a lawyer, that much is clear I assume)
Avatar
Just make it a gratuity.
Avatar
You can’t preemptively pardon someone before they’ve done the act, but as far as I know even if the pardon were itself part of a crime (e.g., an official act done in exchange for a bribe) the pardon couldn’t be undone.
Avatar
Thank you for explaining.
Avatar
Always happy to provide the dubious reassurance that some of this is ways we’ve been at risk for a long time.
Avatar
Avatar
Wouldn't the murder be prosecuted under state law, though?