Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Maximum Spin]

-snip-
I do not think you understand what you're talking about at all.

Then help me understand. In the secret service case I described, how would a prosecutor prosecute the president for the criminal conspiracy?

• The prosecutor files charges of criminal conspiracy against the president.
• In pre-trial, the president claims to the judge that it was an official act and that he should have presumptive immunity.
• The judge finds that ordering the secret service to conduct raids to investigate money laundering is an official act, and grants presumptive immunity.
• The judge requests evidence to lift the presumption.
• The prosecutor provides recorded messages between the president and the secret service where the president explicitly orders the secret service to kill his rival.
• The prosecutor also provides detailed forensic evidence for the criminal actions of the secret service.
• The judge, per the majority opinion, finds that the messages between the president and the secret service implicate the core power of the presidency to communicate with the executive branch, and declares the evidence inadmissible as it is shielded by the immunity.
• The president requests the charges to be summarily dismissed since none of the remaining presented evidence implicate the president in any crimes, even if the evidence is held to be true.
• The judge agrees and summarily dismisses the charges.
• As a bonus, the president offers pardons to the secret service members.

In a normal system, there's no reason why cloaking a criminal act in an official act should hinder the prosecution, yet the majority opinion seems to be putting up insurmountable walls.

There's no cloaking, though. You're literally just talking about an official act. The legal question here would be, does the President have the authority to order the Secret Service to assassinate someone? If so, then the remedy is impeachment; if not, then the act is not official and the remedy is prosecution (and no evidence is shielded). I would argue that, under the enabling statute for the Secret Service, no such power was delegated and therefore it is not an official act, but either way there is a remedy.

[Maximum™]

Can someone please smush Thomas with a steamroller like a tube of toothpaste?

[Folly]

It really bothers me just how many Democrats are resorting to spin right now.

Whenever critics of Biden question his physical and mental constitution, the response should not be, "Trump is worse!". Donald Trump has absolutely nothing to do with the question of whether Biden needs to step aside and let someone more competent take over.

[hector13]

It really bothers me just how many Democrats are resorting to spin right now.

Whenever critics of Biden question his physical and mental constitution, the response should not be, "Trump is worse!". Donald Trump has absolutely nothing to do with the question of whether Biden needs to step aside and let someone more competent take over.

Which Democrat has enough hype to launch a presidential bid with only four months of campaigning left?

[Frumple]

It really bothers me just how many Democrats are resorting to spin right now.

Whenever critics of Biden question his physical and mental constitution, the response should not be, "Trump is worse!". Donald Trump has absolutely nothing to do with the question of whether Biden needs to step aside and let someone more competent take over.

... you're not going to gin up a competitive presidential campaign in about four months, though. No matter how competent you are, and there's no one even approaching that competent in the entirety of the US's political sphere. Someone has to actually exist to take over for folks to be (genuinely, anyway) talking about someone taking over.

Spin's basically all that's left, so spin is what you get. No, folks in their late 70s and early 80s shouldn't be running for president, but unfortunately that's our only actual bloody choices at this point

[Folly]

If you want to say that there is no viable scenario for replacing Biden, that is a valid argument for Biden refusing to step aside. I'm not saying that I 100% agree, but it's a discussion to be had. My point is simply that 'Trump is worse!' should not be a part of that discussion. Trump being bad has nothing to do with whether or not Biden is the best candidate for his party.

Another line that I keep hearing from Democrats about Biden stepping aside, "only Biden can make that decision". Isn't that concept entirely antithetical to the ideals of Democracy? Recently Democrats have been complaining that Trump could declare himself a King, beholden to no law, and how that goes against all principles of Democracy. Yet when the overwhelming majority of voters dislike Biden and want a new candidate, only Biden himself gets to decide whether he stays or goes. That's pretty fucked up.

[Frumple]

Another line that I keep hearing from Democrats about Biden stepping aside, "only Biden can make that decision". Isn't that concept entirely antithetical to the ideals of Democracy? Recently Democrats have been complaining that Trump could declare himself a King, beholden to no law, and how that goes against all principles of Democracy. Yet when the overwhelming majority of voters dislike Biden and want a new candidate, only Biden himself gets to decide whether he stays or goes. That's pretty fucked up.

That... they're saying that because the man's already on the ballots and pretty close to literally no one else can decide he's not going to be on them at this point. The people can't decide he's no longer a candidate, neither can the DNC. It'd take an act of congress (and lmao to that) to stop him from running at this point.

Folks can not vote for him on the ballot, but the limitations on who runs for president are pretty bloody narrow, and largely does boil down to only the candidate getting to decide if they're no longer running once they've jumped through all the other hoops to get on the ballot. That's the exact opposite of being antithetical to democratic principles, it's saying more or less any citizen can run and no third party can strip that from them. It maybe is kinda' fucked up we're so loose in qualifications on presidential runs, but it's damn sure not an anti-democratic principle.

... the majority of democratic voters already had their chance to choose a different candidate, though. The dem primaries have functionally been over for months with an unbeatable majority of the voters involved choosing the man (or not caring enough to vote for someone else, I guess), unfortunately (hell, it's why I didn't even get to vote in a democratic primary; florida cancelled theirs because it literally didn't bloody matter by the time the primaries hit this state).

That supposed overwhelming majority damn sure didn't vote against him when they had a chance to make it official

[nenjin]

Calling for Biden to step down with 4 months until the election is a staggering level of self-sabotage by the Democractic party that beggars belief.

[Robot Parade Leader]

Calling for Biden to step down with 4 months until the election is a staggering level of self-sabotage by the Democractic party that beggars belief.

Pretty much yeah. The guy had a bad night and now some democrats are saying he shouldn't even bother. The ones saying that are the best thing Trump could have ever hoped for. What person lets their loved one out there with a cold anyhow? Jesus, reschedule when he isn't sick. His voice was raspy and you could tell he was sick under those hot TV lights. It's one stupid debate. Sure he had some gaffs. He's Biden. We knew the guy had gaffs back when he was Obama's Vice President. Nobody should be surprised by gaffs like that from Biden because he's had them for years. This is not new.

And guess what, Bush had gaffs all the time. He served two full terms as President. Good God, who cares?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUlqY3W7iRs Bush was non stop gaffs and it didn't keep him out of anything.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h3VT1LoKIls
Basically, most of the show American Dad or at least the early years covered this a lot.

Are people kidding? Saying Bush was stupid and pointing out the stupid stuff he did was like 1/2 of comedy in the 2000s. I don't like that we have to pick between Biden and Trump either but it's a little late to be messing with things now. You throw somebody else in with 4 months left Trump wins. Plus he's not that bad. I mean sure I think a lot of people would like somebody else but if he's really that bad why did nobody catch it until now? Is it me or is everybody overreacting a little bit over one night? Yes, he's not a super star. Yes, he should be more than just better than the other guy, but this is what we have. He hasn't gone off the deep end in over 3 years, so why would he now?

[Great Order]

There's plenty more debates to come too, no doubt. This one's going to leave the public psyche by and large if the next few are good.

[Folly]

Yeah, Biden had one bad night, and he also has plenty of good nights. Do you really want the person with his finger on the nukes to be someone who gets it right sometimes? Do you want the person negotiating with foreign leaders and deciding whether or not we go to war to be someone who gets it right sometimes? President of the United States is a fulltime job, and having both good and bad days just isn't good enough.

It's not just the politicians saying that he should step aside, but polling of voters also shows an overwhelming lack of confidence in Biden. Credible analysts are saying that without some massive turnaround, there is 0% chance of Biden beating Trump based on the current polling trends.

Under normal circumstances it would be unthinkable to change candidates this late in the race. But these are far from normal circumstances, and right now Biden simply does not have a path forward.

[Robot Parade Leader]

Everyone, everyone has a bad day. Expecting people, and I mean anybody no matter who, to be running on all cylinders 24/7 is not going to happen for Anyone. And if that's the standard then there are PLENTY of Trump gaffs. You want perfect? It isn't happening from either candidate. Are you kidding me? If saying Bush was stupid and pointing out the stupid stuff he did was like 1/2 of comedy in the 2000s, then saying Trump was stupid and pointing out the stupid things he did has been like 1/2 of comedy since 2016. Perfection doesn't exist. Demanding perfection or nothing is going to get you nothing. Superman isn't running for office and demanding that isn't gonna get anything.

Come on, the guy got sick. It happens. Jesus Trump got COVID and went for a photo op during the pandemic.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/04/politics/donald-trump-coronavirus-alternate-reality/index.html

If he would have canceled for being sick they would've roasted him for that too. Before the debate they literally claimed he was on performance enhancing drugs. Look, if people are just gonna hate the guy no matter what, then fine, but people need to pick a lane. "He's gonna be  on performance enhancing drugs during the debate," or "He's sick and that's awful during the debate." They're just making it he's getting it bad no matter what. Meanwhile Trump says he's being politically persecuted but also has immunity and he actually kinda does is what the courts are saying, but not clearly. I can't keep track of the whipsawing back and forth and I think that's the plan, to make it so nobody can.

[Frumple]

Yeah, Biden had one bad night, and he also has plenty of good nights. Do you really want the person with his finger on the nukes to be someone who gets it right sometimes? Do you want the person negotiating with foreign leaders and deciding whether or not we go to war to be someone who gets it right sometimes? President of the United States is a fulltime job, and having both good and bad days just isn't good enough.

I mean, I don't disagree, exactly, but the current american public made it abundantly clear nearly a decade ago when trump, in his 70s, was elected the first time that a great many of them do not, in fact, hold the president of the US to those standards. They reinforced that when they elected Biden in his 70s last cycle in the face of a trump that had racked up a 6-7 digit body count on the american people. They've reinforced it again when they've chosen two prospective octogenarians for POTUS, one of which incited a fucking coup attempt and led over a million citizens to the goddamn grave.

Our nation should be holding our prospective commander in chief to high standards. We're also very, very obviously not doing that and haven't been for basically my entire goddamn life at a minimum.

At least biden actually has good days, ha.

===

Though, that said, there are paths forward. It's entirely possible folks just friggin' forget about the debate in the next four months, especially if there's more and performance is significantly different. It's possible one or both of the POTUS candidates frikkin' die, 'cause they're both goddamn ancient and shouldn't be running for office (I will laugh until I cry if this year's october surprise is "Whoops, campaign is now VP vs VP 'cause both the presidential noms are dead from age related issues"). It can sink in that trump's even less coherent than biden is when the latter's ill and it's late. Lots of crap can happen in the next few months.

[Folly]

Everyone, everyone has a bad day. Expecting people, and I mean anybody no matter who, to be running on all cylinders 24/7 is not going to happen for Anyone. And if that's the standard then there are PLENTY of Trump gaffs. You want perfect? It isn't happening from either candidate. Are you kidding me? If saying Bush was stupid and pointing out the stupid stuff he did was like 1/2 of comedy in the 2000s, then saying Trump was stupid and pointing out the stupid things he did has been like 1/2 of comedy since 2016. Perfection doesn't exist. Demanding perfection or nothing is going to get you nothing. Superman isn't running for office and demanding that isn't gonna get anything.

Again, an argument that Trump is worse is not an argument that Biden is the best option for the Democrat Party.

Biden's critics are not calling him out for being less than perfect, they're calling him out for being ancient and unable to finish a sentence without a teleprompter. There are no perfect candidates, but there are younger ones.

[Robot Parade Leader]

Again, it's too late to do this four months from election. It didn't make sense the first time people said it and I say it doesn't make sense now.

Yup. Biden's very old. He's been old for a while now. Lots of people DO NOT WANT to have a rematch of Trump and Biden with the same old stuff from the last time only now they're both even older. A lot of people didn't want this crap 4 years ago and don't want it now.... Biden wasn't necessarily my first pick either, but meh, he's not the worst out there. If he was having the mental difficulties they claim he is then why did no one propose this months ago? They are absolutely calling him out for being less than perfect, on one night in a debate. I'm saying it is an overreaction to one bad debate. I'm saying it's too late to do this 4 months from the election, because it would paint Trump as right and help him win. The reason he couldn't do that was because of a cold. If they were gonna do this then they should've done it long ago.

There are younger candidates? Who? Who's been running on a democratic presidential ticket? Biden and nobody. I wouldn't mind a candidate that is younger necessarily, but the election is when? It's suicide to run a presidential campaign with a new person 4 months before the election. Unless Biden has gone absolutely nuts, it isn't worth the risk.

Ultimately this is going to be based on one of two beliefs people have. Either:
A.) Someone thinks Biden has completely and utterly lost it, in which case 25th amendment time and new candidate (Good luck pulling that off well and winning, but if he truly has lost it). OR
B.) Someone thinks Biden had a cold during a debate and it's better now, in which case do nothing, because it was just a cold.

So the people talking about removing Biden better be able to show conclusively that he has totally lost it, and go on full force removing him not only as a candidate but also as president where Harris takes over as VP, or else quit handing trump the election. They need to pick a lane. Did Biden just have a cold or do they have evidence he's nuts (No not just a bad debate. If he's nuts they can do actual tests for it). Heck they didn't remove Trump from office under 25th amendment either and he said some nutty things so good luck with that.