United States Corrupt Twattery

[Wij]

What Trump deliberately brings is this:

Most Americans have no idea how anti-worker the US supreme court has become | Steven Greenhouse

The court’s current justices are some of the most hostile to labor rights in modern US history

www.theguardian.com

Remember he never paid a worker that he couldn’t welch on unless he had to.

 

[Wij]

Also, did this slip by:

https://www.cnn.com/2024/06/30/opinions/2024-debate-trump-biden-palestinians-racism-obeidallah/index.html

 

[Wij]

Some crazy shit in this ruling on presidential immunity from SCOTUS. Between this and the other recent rulings congress and federal agencies are virtually powerless. The presidency and the courts hold all the cards:


View: https://twitter.com/emptywheel/status/1807788062207889689?s=61&t=iv1E1O7hVRuRm0TFdyUzyw


There’d be very little to stop the fake electors scheme working next time round.

 

[Tom]

Project 2025. The USA is in deep trouble. Olive Branch Petitions don't work.

 

[Scouse]

Some crazy shit in this ruling on presidential immunity from SCOTUS.

Or some frankly very predictable shit tbh.

To be fair though. I thought the "I shagged a hooker" shit would slide, so I could have been wrong on this.

 

[Wij]

Asking to stop counting the votes, halting the election process, is an official act, according to SCOTUS and Trump was immune, and will be again:


View: https://youtu.be/nAAQUuomBQI?si=_fa5DjsG7pL85snq


If it even comes to that. I’m sure there will be ways to use this ruling to stay in power without going to any of that trouble. Scary shit. How they can call themselves constitutionalists is beyond me. They want a King.

 

[Tom]

I watched Civil War and thought "that won't happen". But with acts like this, fiction becomes reality.

 

[Scouse]

Tricky dicky would have got off tbh.

I think perhaps this is the inevitable result of the end of the 'gentlemans agreement' not to prosecute your political opponents. It's clearly always been a risk, but never an issue - but with the partisan nature of todays politics this is the consequence.

The guy makes a good point. The partisan split doesn't look good for the supreme court.

 

[Wij]

Tricky dicky would have got off tbh.

I think perhaps this is the inevitable result of the end of the 'gentlemans agreement' not to prosecute your political opponents. It's clearly always been a risk, but never an issue - but with the partisan nature of todays politics this is the consequence.

The guy makes a good point. The partisan split doesn't look good for the supreme court.

There’s never been such a gentleman’s agreement since the president and congress have no power to prosecute.

It was only ever an issue for Nixon who was pardoned in exchange for resigning. Trump has no intention of standing down to make the prosecution of his crimes go away.

 

[Scouse]

There’s never been such a gentleman’s agreement since the president and congress have no power to prosecute.

Nah - I mean the new phenomenom of launching loads of prosecutions against political opponents, which wasn't previously the case - despite the GOP and Dems having plenty of ammo to do exactly that against each other.

Trump is under what, 80-odd criminal enditements?

There's loads - Obama could have fallen foul of a load of criminal charges (which, clearly, he'd actually be immune from given the recent ruling). Yadda yadda yadda...

The "weaponisation" of the legal system is a thing that's absolutely happened to Trump and not to other ex-presidents.

 

[ECA]

Well, America had a good run.

 

[Scouse]

Well, America had a good run.

TBH - it's arguable the revolution failed when the federal reserve act was passed.

 

[Wij]

Nah - I mean the new phenomenom of launching loads of prosecutions against political opponents, which wasn't previously the case - despite the GOP and Dems having plenty of ammo to do exactly that against each other.

Trump is under what, 80-odd criminal enditements?

There's loads - Obama could have fallen foul of a load of criminal charges (which, clearly, he'd actually be immune from given the recent ruling). Yadda yadda yadda...

The "weaponisation" of the legal system is a thing that's absolutely happened to Trump and not to other ex-presidents.

Utter bollocks. Trump was a criminal before, during and after the White House. There is literally no comparison with Obama.

 

[Wij]

Anyway:


View: https://twitter.com/dirkschwenk/status/1807822432419422638?s=46&t=XVSp3UnKbFRV1NkwP-6itg

 

[Scouse]

Utter bollocks. Trump was a criminal before, during and after the White House. There is literally no comparison with Obama.

How about Dubya then?

It doesn't matter if there's no comparison, btw - we know Trump is a cunt - it's whether any ex-presidents did anything illegal, and whether their political opponents pursued it through the courts - which they A) did and B) didn't happen.

 

[Wij]

How about Dubya then?

It doesn't matter if there's no comparison, btw - we know Trump is a cunt - it's whether any ex-presidents did anything illegal, and whether their political opponents pursued it through the courts - which they A) did and B) didn't happen.

Political opponents don’t pursue through courts. That’s not how it works. You don’t understand the prosecutorial system in the US.

 

[Wij]

Political oppose don’t pursue through courts. That’s not how it works. You don’t understand the prosecutorial system in the US.

Although Project 2025 wants to change all that so they can.

 

[Scouse]

Political opponents don’t pursue through courts. That’s not how it works. You don’t understand the prosecutorial system in the US.

I don't think you believe that really. But hey ho.

 

[Gwadien]

I don't think you believe that really. But hey ho.

Do you think Democrat supporters are that entrenched that they'd support the Democrats running the courts?

 

[Wij]

District attorney - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[Gwadien]

@Scouse read up about Project 2025 which Trump has pretty much adopted as his manifesto, and then come back with your 'they're all as bad as each other' argument.

 

[Wij]

@Scouse read up about Project 2025 which Trump has pretty much adopted as his manifesto, and then come back with your 'they're all as bad as each other' argument.

It literally complains that they can’t pursue their opponents through the courts and proposes ways to fix that.

 

[Gwadien]

It literally complains that they can’t pursue their opponents through the courts and proposes ways to fix that.

Also sack all civil servants and have them reapply, only being accepted if they're loyal to Trump.

 

[Wij]

Also sack all civil servants and have them reapply, only being accepted if they're loyal to Trump.

Yep. But they’re all the same.

 

[Scouse]

Do you think Democrat supporters are that entrenched that they'd support the Democrats running the courts?

Eh up

I'd say both sides are tbh.

 

[Scouse]

Yep. But they’re all the same.

I'm not saying they're all the same. I've specifically and repeatedly said that Trump is the uber-cunt.

But you will play no truck with anything that paints the democrats in a shitty light. So yeah, @Gwadien's accusation of entrenchment I'd level at both of you.

I support neither of them. I think Trump is objectively worse. But the Dems are also a massive shitshow.

Last time I'll be saying that.

 

[Wij]

All the judges said it at their hearings:


View: https://twitter.com/accountablegop/status/1807882444663587082?s=46&t=XVSp3UnKbFRV1NkwP-6itg

 

[Scouse]

All the judges said it at their hearings:


View: https://twitter.com/accountablegop/status/1807882444663587082?s=46&t=XVSp3UnKbFRV1NkwP-6itg

Said what? That nobody is above the law?

Well, he's not lying - if he believes that the law provides a level of immunity to the president, then the president is still subject to the law.

They change the law, removing that immunity, then the president can be prosecuted for more stuff. Lets see Biden push that through eh?

 

[Wij]

Said what? That nobody is above the law?

Well, he's not lying - if he believes that the law provides a level of immunity to the president, then the president is still subject to the law.

They change the law, removing that immunity, then the president can be prosecuted for more stuff. Lets see Biden push that through eh?

They didn’t introduce a new law for this. They are interpreting the constitution. Which hasn’t changed since their hearings. It’s the same document. If they said that the president is fully bound by the law but already knew they didn’t mean criminal statutes in a wide range of situations then they’ve told a big whopper. Don’t be so obtuse.

 

[Gwadien]

I'm not saying they're all the same. I've specifically and repeatedly said that Trump is the uber-cunt.

But you will play no truck with anything that paints the democrats in a shitty light. So yeah, @Gwadien's accusation of entrenchment I'd level at both of you.

I support neither of them. I think Trump is objectively worse. But the Dems are also a massive shitshow.

Last time I'll be saying that.

Governments have always been corrupt and done fucked up shit, I don't think it's any worse than it has been historically, but Trump is on another level, indefensible.

I just think it's time for reasonable people to stand up for the lesser of two evils, which applies to both the US and the UK. I don't think now is a time for champagne anarchism.