https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-immunity-appeal-jack-smith-supreme-court-clarence-thomas-1851643
The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to look at whether the Republican former president is immune from federal prosecution.
Hmmm...any guesses if he actually will? Cause I bet there is zero chance that he does.
he didn't recuse himself when his wife was on the docket... so why would he recuse himself from trump?
Can we at least update the description of Supreme Court Justice to remove impartiality and instead say something to the effect of 'forces their will on people less fortunate?'
I like the term ‘lawyer-deciders’ because what do you call a bus full of lawyers at the bottom of a lake?
A good start?
That's not really fair, though. A lot of lawyers are fighting the good fight, such as environmental lawyers, those of the Southern Poverty Law Center, the ACLU and various other organizations who provide pro bono representation to those who couldn't afford a good lawyer otherwise.
I don't see any chance the supreme court could rule that he would be immune to charges for attempting to steal an election. If they were to rule he had absolute immunity it would be giving every president forward who wants to stay in office the right to just cancel the elections.
That said, Clarence won't want his name listed as voting against protecting little hands in this, so him stepping aside gives him the ability to not vote against, and look like he did the right thing.
Quite clearly the Supreme Court doesn't care about national stability. So who can say what will happen. They've overturned decades of jurisprudence, so speculation is fun but we really have no idea.
They already showed how it's done in Bush v Gore: just declare the case can't be used as precedent.
They want a republican dictator. A democrat currently holds the office. If they rule that Trump can’t be held liable, there’s nothing stopping Biden from doing the same successfully. And that should terrify them.
I'm gonna put the odds at roughly 1000:1 that he does.
Actually, there are betting sites for this that would be, supposedly, more accurate than I am at creating those odds. What are the odds on the betting sites?
Edit: I'm not finding the odds.....
Edit 2: Apparently there are 5:1 odds on if Trump takes a plea bargain. I would have set those a bit higher since he is willing to settle cases, but I doubt he's willing to accept jail time of any sort.
I can't see trump taking a plea deal while he's still running for president. He's going to try to delay as long as he can, get elected, and then use his position as president to weasel out of any charges, even if it means pardoning himself. And since he's that number 1 target, the one that they want bad enough to give lenient plea deals to others in exchange for testimony, I find it hard to believe that he'd be offered a plea that doesn't send him to prison. So why admit to being guilty when he can keep telling his followers that it's a witch hunt and generate more support?
Clarence Thomas: "Fuck you, I don't have to answer to anyone. I'm a Supreme Court Justice. I am the law."
I don't even have to think about clicking on that link to know with absolute certainty that Clarence Thomas isn't under any pressure whatsoever.
How much is that recusal worth to you?
Is it, say, "new RV" worth it? Or perhaps, maybe it's "buy my mother a house" worth it?
Clarence is for sale, so let the bidding begin!
... You know on closer inspection I can't help but notice that for an American you're about 8 stories tall and look to be from the paleolithic era...
DAMNIT NESSIE GET OFF LEMMY!
Well it was about that time when I noticed that Clarence Thomas was about 8 stories tall and not a Supreme Court Judge after all, but the Lochness monster!
the court is openly, blatantly corrupt. I see no reason that should stop for this case in particular. being said, I also see no reason they would rule in favor of trump. he made a mistake that not many power brokers survive: he's depending on favors he's done for the justices in the past in getting them nominated rather than on what he can do for them in the future, and he's essentially said out loud that he's gonna consolidate all power including theirs in the office of PotUS if elected again. They'll let him coup us, but I don't think they'll let him coup them and I highly doubt they'll declare the president completely above the law while the sitting president is a democrat.
I highly doubt they'll declare the president completely above the law while the sitting president is a democrat.
I'm imagining a scenario where they do that and then Biden immediately orders drive strikes on the Republican justices, because why the hell not?
I highly doubt they’ll declare the president completely above the law while the sitting president is a democrat.
That wouldn't stop them because they know that good is dumb.
I honestly don't think the more recent "conservative" additions save gorsich actually would care if he did. They'd ride off rich into the sunset as "prestigious" SCOTUS members.
if they were gonna retire rich on billionaire donor money they would have already done it. look at Corrupt Clarence: as long as he's sitting on the bench he can count on thousand dollar/day vacations and he knows that. As soon as he has nothing to offer his billionaire owners they'll pull up stakes and move on the bribing the next justice.
The way current day bribery political connections work is that you work on someone's behalf and then when you're done working in government you get a position as a board member, director position, whatever, from the people you helped profit so they can give you a gigantic salary as compensation for your favors for them without the government being able to do anything about it. I don't think any politician stays in the game for the free trips.
with scotus it seems like they don't ever bother with the veil of delayed rewards anymore. someone gives a justice a pile of money, that justice rules in their favor, and as long as neither of them says "hey, that pile of money is definitely to buy rulings and not as a gift freely given to someone who just happens to have the final say in the law of the land" then no one can 'prove' bribery. the fact is at this point they're mocking us openly.
sitting president is a democrat
That would matter if the sitting president had some conviction beyond the status quo. He doesn't, and if they declare Trump is above the law, Biden will staunchly refuse to take advantage of that power...because, reasons.
The D's inaction is what got us here. I don't expect that to change in the next 12 months.
there's an inherent conflict in democrats where they want to be politicians while appearing to be above politics and what it ends up meaning is abandoning any position that's challenged by the opposition as "political", "divisive" or "agenda-driven". they're rich, coddled cowards.
with that being said, I feel like in most cases Rs are politically adroit enough to pull the ladder up behind them even when they don't think Ds will bother trying to climb it.
My take is this, and bear with me until the end; The Court is wildly conservative, not partisan. They're not on Trump's side. They owe him nothing.
See, once you're in for life, who gives a fuck? And that's very much the idea behind lifetime appointments. Sucks now, but I'm still down for it. Would we rather they be susceptible to political winds? (I'll take a Justice for all 12 circuit courts, at the least, please and thank you.)
Another thing that gets discounted, because they're in for life they owe nothing except to their legal legacy, their history. Most Justices, even the ones you hate, take this very, very seriously. Can't go any higher, their legacy is all they have left to define their life's work.
Thomas OTOH, is the most blatantly corrupt Justice I've seen in life, and I ain't a young 'un. This animal only cares about getting paid, no regard for his legacy, no shame. I see no reason or way he can be pressured out.
See, once you're in for life, who gives a fuck?
Exactly, so if you're a corrupt conservative POS - per your own argument, who gives a fuck? There is no reality in which these justices are held accountable, and if they were they'll have made enough cash to still sit pretty for life.
Sure, they're not partisan, but the forces funneling money and gifts into their pockets are.
The court is for sale. It's a hog trough. I don't think any of them give a fuck about their reputations.
Clarence Thomas might as well be Falstaff:
"Can honour set to a leg? no: or an arm? no: or take away the grief of a wound? no. Honour hath no skill in surgery, then? no. What is honour? a word. What is in that word honour? what is that honour? air. A trim reckoning! Who hath it? he that died o’ Wednesday. Doth he feel it? no. Doth he hear it? no. ‘Tis insensible, then. Yea, to the dead. But will it not live with the living? no. Why? detraction will not suffer it. Therefore I’ll none of it. Honour is a mere scutcheon: and so ends my catechism."
(Henry IV part 1 act V scene 1)
They still need their conservative allies in the lower courts and conservative funding to get their purpose made cases to make it up to SCOTUS. But, I think you're right. Those colluding conservative legal forces aren't MAGA fanatics. They just used the movement as a means to an end.
However, the MAGA base is ultimately a force they don't want to piss off directly. They're domestic terrorists, and death threats their favorite currency.
These cowards got twisted in a knot when they were publicly ostracized after revoking women's rights. Imagine how they would receive more than well deserved mean words.
His wife was involved in Jan 6th.
If he doesn't, democracy is dead. Even if he votes against trump. Legitimacy is gone.
This is how our constitution works tho. He's talking about the institutions that make up our specific democracy
Call it what you will, just don't call it democracy when the will of the minority is exerted on the majority.
My dude the USA is a representative democracy.
That's the way that kind of government sometimes functions, which is why we need strong institutions.
It is not representative tho. I learned in school that a principle of democracy is the equal vote. Each vote counts the same. In the USA each vote counts for a random amount and the people actually electing the president are not even bound to the election results. With the supreme court being this openly corrupt the path to a dictatorship is not that far off.
I learned in school that a principle of democracy is the equal vote.
In a direct democracy, this is true. In a representative democracy, this is not.
In the USA each vote counts for a random amount
It isn't random, and the amount is absolutely gamed in favor of a certain party, which is, again, why we need strong institutions.
The president isn't voted on as part of the representatives, the office of the president is a separate vote and is supposed to be a direct vote. But the number of electors for each state has not kept up with each state's population, which has fucked up the power of presidential votes.
Democracy just means that the power ultimately rests in the hands of the people. The fact that we vote for our representatives, meaning it's ultimately up to us, makes us a democracy. The electoral system is not contradictory to a democracy.
FPTP voting allows a candidate who is highly unpopular by any measure to win over a more popular candidate. Single-member districts allow a party to win a fraction of seats in a legislature that is vastly greater than the fraction of the population who voted for them. Bullshit like the Electoral College just straight up counts some votes more than others.
That's just the stuff that's above board. With gerrymandering, voter suppression, and just plain rigging the vote, anything is possible.
The fact that there are flaws in our democracy does not make it not a democracy.
There are essentially only 4 forms of government, based on the ultimate source of power:
Even in the case where there are flaws, ultimately the power resides in the people. If we all banded together and voted for someone who would get rid of gerrymandering and the FPTP voting system, and all that BS, we could make it happen. Which means we are still a democracy.
At some point a democracy is so flawed it stops being a democracy in any meaningful sense. The stuff I mentioned exists on a spectrum that includes "democracy" in Russia. They have votes but nobody thinks they have democracy. Hence my original comment.
If you define democracy as a state where people can change things if they all band together, then every country in history has been a democracy because people have always had the theoretical option to band together and overthrow their government by force.
The said I mentioned exists on a spectrum that includes "democracy" in Russia. They have votes but nobody thinks they have democracy. Hence my original comment.
I mean, of course! His own wife was one of the co-conspirators!
What about the 3 people on the court who owe their cushy lifetime gig to him, though? The ones whose legal bribes still depend on his rabid following approving of them? Does anyone really think that they don't have a conflict of interest?
Btw, that Newsweek fairness meter? By conflating left-right political views with fairness, it ironically reinforces the common misconception that a centrist perspective equals fairness, incentivising any reporter of theirs who cares about the meter to adopt a centrist point of view, thus making their reporting less fair and objective.
Luckily the three on the court already don't actually owe him shit. I don't have a lot of faith in them, but once on the court, they will be there forever, no matter what the orange poo ball says or does.
The orange garbage can may think they'll be loyal to him, but we all know that loyalty only works one way with him.
Again my faith in these three is lowwwwww, but it's not a given that they rule in his favor.
Don't underestimate the power of stochastic terrorism. They may not owe him anything, but they have a pretty good idea of what he'll do if they rule against him. They're corrupt, not stupid.
Nasty nicknames and accusations of disloyalty will be followed by imprecations for someone to rid him of these turbulent justices, and the next thing they know they're facing some wacko with a baseball bat.
the three on the court already don't actually owe him shit. I don't have a lot of faith in them, but once on the court, they will be there forever, no matter what the orange poo ball says or does.
True, but you're forgetting the millions if not tens or even hundreds of millions worth of various bribes go away if they're no longer considered "loyal" to the Mango Mussolini.
They didn't get to or near the top of those Federalist Society lists by NOT being corrupt as fuck, after all..
That's a good point. I expect these organizations intend to outlast the orange shit stain so it's just a matter of the winds of change blowing the other way, something which they have control over.
I expect these organizations intend to outlast the orange shit stain
Yeah they intend to, but they don't yet know if they can. Just look at Kevin McCarthy acting all principled on January 7th when he thought it was finally over, only to come crawling back when it turned out that even treason wasn't enough..
When has Clarence Thomas ever done the right thing? When do people think he will ever act properly under pressure?
POS won't recuse. POS will write an opinion letting Cheeto chimp off the hook. My fingers crossed he's in minority.