Hold on there, citation ####ing needed. "An obsession with renewables causing job and investment losses"? How about an ideological turnip using vague unintelligible "rules" to shut down 2 industries in Alberta, killing investment, jobs and ultimately increasing our energy costs?
The absolute dumbest thing about the reporting on this court decision is the media coming out and saying this would theoretically protect Biden from Trump, there is 0 chance this court would show the internal consistency required to afford Biden the same protections, they would tie themselves up in knots explaining how it is different to drag a president through a trial when it is a republican fantasy, and how that is the correct usage of judicial powers.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to #-3 For This Useful Post:
What was too far left that every country now has to rebound from?
I'm still waiting for his response to this. I'm trying to figure out where wanton / extreme socialist and communist policies were taking over the international discourse. I'm pretty sure what he really means is 'woke' and 'renewable energy' and stuff like that - concepts that are only 'left' in people's minds because they need to be against it, probably, since it has been determined that it doesn't seem, for some weird reason, to fit into their own side's narrative.
The Following User Says Thank You to Muta For This Useful Post:
So this ruling is bad as it looks, right? Can someone explain it to me, it appears that the president can do wherever they want with no repercussions? They could also classify everything they do as presidential actions, so they aren’t tried for personal actions? Does this ruling override constitutional amendments?
So this ruling is bad as it looks, right? Can someone explain it to me, it appears that the president can do wherever they want with no repercussions? They could also classify everything they do as presidential actions, so they aren’t tried for personal actions? Does this ruling override constitutional amendments?
As long as they say 'i'm officially' when they're commiting the crime, then it's ok
So this ruling is bad as it looks, right? Can someone explain it to me, it appears that the president can do wherever they want with no repercussions? They could also classify everything they do as presidential actions, so they aren’t tried for personal actions? Does this ruling override constitutional amendments?
“When the President does it that means it’s not illegal”
-Richard Nixon
Prescient man before his time. Watergate’s not even really a crime anymore. This is gonna be a gas watching democrats use an antiquated playbook while getting held down and violated by republicans. When they go low we go high
Yes, that's always the problem. Blame the people trying to defend rights and stamp out bigotry. "If only they'd try to understand why we hate them and demand control of their lives and their bodies!"
We understand. It's not ####ing complicated. We've rejected it.
This is precisely the problem.
Here we are.
__________________ It's only game. Why you heff to be mad?
I'm still waiting for his response to this. I'm trying to figure out where wanton / extreme socialist and communist policies were taking over the international discourse. I'm pretty sure what he really means is 'woke' and 'renewable energy' and stuff like that - concepts that are only 'left' in people's minds because they need to be against it, probably, since it has been determined that it doesn't seem, for some weird reason, to fit into their own side's narrative.
In Europe (as seen in France) and probably soon, Canada, the overwhelming issue causing the shift to the right is uncontrolled immigration. In the States, it could be argued that it's a combination of capitalism taking over traditionally public services, and religion, creating a rift in lived realities (extremism) and the destruction of the free press (the backbone of democracy).
edit : it could be argued that the right caused much of the issues pushing people to the right, but it's also the left, when in power, that continued the policies that exasperated the rift. They had no intention of killing personal cash cows, like the privatization of the judicial system. They didn't even increase the supreme court size to balance the ideological nutjobs Trump put in, let alone act quickly when they had the chance to load the supreme court themselves. There's a big list, and failure to act has pushed Americans to extremism, and the right has a bigger base to work from.
__________________
"By Grabthar's hammer ... what a savings."
Last edited by Harry Lime; 07-02-2024 at 12:54 PM.
I'm going to say distrust bred into media propagated by the proliferation of misinformation and disinformation that is algorithmically available at the touch of your fingers. Then combine that with a steaming pile of housing crisis that has been growing as a problem for decades, a long overdue tightening on low-skill immigration needed, and the cost of living/wage gap not being properly addressed.
My problem is that people gravitate to a strongman who thinks they will 'day one' all the issues back in the right direction. This will only serve to complicate things by stripping away people's rights and freedom to choose. Maybe not on day one, but slowly and surely, dictatorships strengthen their hold on societies through spurious rationale for doing extreme things, and using patriotism to justify nefarious actions. Then they enshrine them in the constitutional frameworks of their 'democracies'. The US is starting to look like multiple South American and former Soviet-bloc democracies.
I also really get pre and post-Brexit vibes from this whole thing. Something something leopards eat faces.
So this ruling is bad as it looks, right? Can someone explain it to me, it appears that the president can do wherever they want with no repercussions? They could also classify everything they do as presidential actions, so they aren’t tried for personal actions? Does this ruling override constitutional amendments?
Basically what this ruling really says, is if you're supporters are the people they feel team allegiance with, they will drag out and proceeding to help you stall for as long as possible, and chip away at the charges until they don't really properly encompass the crime itself. But that they want to re-litigate each individual instance to make sure that if you are not on the team they let the charges go ahead, because if a democrat does it it's not official.
In Europe (as seen in France) and probably soon, Canada, the overwhelming issue causing the shift to the right is uncontrolled immigration. In the States, it could be argued that it's a combination of capitalism taking over traditionally public services, and religion, creating a rift in lived realities (extremism) and the destruction of the free press (the backbone of democracy).
Are people really that worried and tangibly affected by immigration? It seems more likely that these right wing populist guys have figure out it is a winning message. Generate a bunch of fear about immigrants and get everyone to blame every problem they have on immigration.
Go through a rural part of a state like NC, VA, and WV, and you'll see all sorts of anti-immigration propaganda. There is absolutely no chance that immigrants are not going to find their towns take their jobs and rape their children, but they sure are convinced it is a big problem for them.
It's disheartening that it is a message that works so well in so many places in the world. People sure seem to have a strong belief that the fluke of where they were born entitles them and only them to be in a country.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to nfotiu For This Useful Post:
In Europe (as seen in France) and probably soon, Canada, the overwhelming issue causing the shift to the right is uncontrolled immigration. In the States, it could be argued that it's a combination of capitalism taking over traditionally public services, and religion, creating a rift in lived realities (extremism) and the destruction of the free press (the backbone of democracy).
edit : it could be argued that the right caused much of the issues pushing people to the right, but it's also the left, when in power, that continued the policies that exasperated the rift. They had no intention of killing personal cash cows, like the privatization of the judicial system. They didn't even increase the supreme court size to balance the ideological nutjobs Trump put in, let alone act quickly when they had the chance to load the supreme court themselves. There's a big list, and failure to act has pushed Americans to extremism, and the right has a bigger base to work from.
Yeah...
It's like that spoke-bike meme where the driver puts the stick in his own spokes. The driver is the democrat. Sure, the republicans have put pitfalls in the road, spikes to take out the tires, jagged branches poking out... but at the end of the day the democrats still self insert the ####ing stick into the spokes.
So this ruling is bad as it looks, right? Can someone explain it to me, it appears that the president can do wherever they want with no repercussions? They could also classify everything they do as presidential actions, so they aren’t tried for personal actions? Does this ruling override constitutional amendments?
Not really. It mainly just codifies what was already the standard before, with some blatant carve outs to benefit Trump's current legal woes. But ultimately, criminal prosecution for acts during a Presidency have never really been a relevant factor and anyone thinking Trump was going to end up in prison were kidding themselves.
People talk about more fantastic scenarios like murdering political rivals and whatnot, but the obstacles to those things were never really the threat of criminal prosecution (and something like that would still be prosecutable after this ruling). If a President murders someone and wants to avoid prosecution, they could always just resign right before the end of their term and have their VP pardon them, and they'd be in the clear criminally. That has always been the case. But there would be political and other consequences to that, including potentially getting murdered yourself later on.
Of course the problem these days is there aren't really political consequences for the less dramatic criminal acts, like things like corruption. But that's more part of a long-term degradation of the American political landscape.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to opendoor For This Useful Post:
The president right now is a Democrat, if Biden had any balls he'd go ham wild and do whatever he wants. Thanks suypremeCourt, six of you can leave. Nothing he does is illegal
__________________ MMF is the tough as nails cop that "plays by his own rules". The force keeps suspending him when he crosses the line but he keeps coming back and then cracks a big case.
-JiriHrdina
What is precisely the problem? You say "People on each side can't comprehend why the other side thinks the way they do and can't be bothered to spend the time to understand why. " But it's not mystery and one side has understood the other side. So what is it? That the left needs to accept it and move on? I'm baffled by what you are trying to get at now. Is it really that the right openly embraces authoritarianism, and can't understand why the left just won't accept it like good little fascists? The educated tend to reject this stuff, so perhaps the right is upset the left is too educated? Why listen to experts when you can make #### up?
What is precisely the problem? You say "People on each side can't comprehend why the other side thinks the way they do and can't be bothered to spend the time to understand why. " But it's not mystery and one side has understood the other side. So what is it? That the left needs to accept it and move on? I'm baffled by what you are trying to get at now. Is it really that the right openly embraces authoritarianism, and can't understand why the left just won't accept it like good little fascists? The educated tend to reject this stuff, so perhaps the right is upset the left is too educated? Why listen to experts when you can make #### up?
YOU and your attitude is precisely the problem. Name calling, your mightier than thou posts. All of it. Look at everything you post, it's pure vitriol, just like the demagogue who is likely to become POTUS. There is no discourse, no discussion, no debate, just paint everyone to doesn't agree with your viewpoint a fascist and job done. Everything you say and believe is right and everything they stand for and believe is wrong.
Here we are.
__________________ It's only game. Why you heff to be mad?
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to DoubleK For This Useful Post:
