Comment by krapp
2 days ago
>but some people need to spend a significant amount of their lives in prison.
Short of rewriting the constitution, that just isn't going to happen. The president is immune to prosecution for any crime committed in office and has unlimited power to pardon anyone else of any federal crimes.
And if the Democrats even attempt to do anything of the sort, people will just consider it a partisan witchhunt. It will be litigated all the way to a SCOTUS that's stacked with Trumpist ideologues.
People will correctly consider it a partisan witchhunt, but that is ultimately the only way back to "normal". Pack the court and start the prosecutions. Look at Hungary and Poland.
(The UK has the opportunity to do this before the fash get into power, but we can watch it being fumbled in real time)
> Short of rewriting the constitution, that just isn't going to happen
then a new constitution it is!
Realistically this is what the Constitutional convention mechanism is for, but for the last several decades the Democrats have viewed any suggestion of employing it as a Republican plot and have opted instead for not having a plan and trying to prop up a creaky status quo.
[dead]
no this is false and a superficial search confirms it. No need to make extensive citations because this level of talk does not warrant it.
provide one citation, then.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-939_e2pg.pdf
> The president is immune to prosecution for any crime committed in office
That's a misreading of the SC decision. If he walks down the street and murders someone, unless he can make a case that it was an official act, then he wouldn't have immunity. He'd need to demonstrate that he has the Constitutional authority to murder people on the street, and he doesn't, so it wouldn't be an official act and he wouldn't have any immunity.
6 replies →
“Aye, scallywag, yer SCOTUS rulings reading ain’t fit for kindergarten; read the chart again: official acts may be immune, but private crimes still face prosecution.”
1 reply →
> a SCOTUS that's stacked with Trumpist ideologues.
It's majority conservative, but that's not the same thing as what you're claiming here.
It has 3 members appointed by Trump, but even that doesn't make them Trumpist ideologues.
I really can't find any other possible interpretation of their wall to wall decisions on anything election related. They are a knowing and enthusiastic participant in the coup.
Thomas is a born and bred loser, but otherwise they're afraid of being assassinated. Judges are under massive, massive amounts of threat whenever they think to hold Trump to literally any scrutiny whatsoever.
Not a conspiracy theory, this is an open discussion topic among federal judges within their own conferences.
2 replies →
I don't believe for a second that Trump, being the narcissist that he is, would appoint anyone but ideologues.
Probably more loyalists than ideologues. It’s the Project 2025 influence that has the ideologues. And the Thiel/Vance sector has the traditional influence-focused corruption, while the Trump family is more low-trust-society personal enrichment grift.
Quite a perfect storm.