Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Donald Trump the Megathread part II - threadbans and mod warnings in OP

Options
1…4950525455

Comments

  • Options
    #1532
    Igotadose
    Registered Users Posts: 13,445 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122326377#Comment_122326377

    Not that precise; 'official acts' are immune.



  • Options
    #1533
    crusd
    Registered Users Posts: 1,222 ✭✭✭crusd


    It really is a Banana republic. If the supreme court were ruling purely on the law on not on their political beliefs there is no way 6 conservative Judges would always vote one way and 3 liberal judges would vote the other. Someone would a least some of the time find the opposite ruling to their side



  • Options
    #1534
    uptherebels
    Registered Users Posts: 1,600 ✭✭✭uptherebels


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122326377#Comment_122326377

    That's some wishful thinking



  • Options
    #1535
    y0ssar1an22
    Registered Users Posts: 16,817 ✭✭✭✭y0ssar1an22


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122326377#Comment_122326377

    congress should change the law but of course they wont.



  • Options
    #1536
    odyssey06
    Registered Users Posts: 29,356 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    From the BBC:

    The justices are leaving it to a lower court to decide if two actions taken by Donald Trump were unofficial acts:

    1. Trying to convince certain state officials that alleged election fraud meant they should change the state's electoral votes for Trump
    2. Creating lists of what are commonly called "false electors" for the states to send to congress to case the electoral votes for Trump

    These both relate to charges Trump faces in the state of Georgia.

    Trump and 18 others are being prosecuted in Georgia for conspiracy to overturn the state's 2020 election results, which they deny.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/live/cw0y5228v1yt

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1537
    uptherebels
    Registered Users Posts: 1,600 ✭✭✭uptherebels


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122326413#Comment_122326413

    They don't always. It comes down to the individual cases



  • Options
    #1538
    y0ssar1an22
    Registered Users Posts: 16,817 ✭✭✭✭y0ssar1an22


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122326413#Comment_122326413

    ACB (apparently the biggest trump supporter) wrote the dissent a few days ago in a 6-3 split.



  • Options
    #1539
    Quin_Dub
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 15,442 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122326383#Comment_122326383

    The complexity of determining what is an "Official" act and what isn't can't be under estimated.

    For example - Let's say the President decides to re-introduce prohibition on Alcohol and then in another ruling legalises Marijuana.

    Technically both those are "official" acts - He's allowed to introduce new laws.

    But what if we then find out that he received a massive personal bribe from the Marijuana industry to make those changes?

    Is that still an Official act even though it was done for personal gain??

    They could spend years arguing the toss over the details here.



  • Options
    #1540
    Brief_Lives
    Registered Users Posts: 3,080 ✭✭✭Brief_Lives


    So, Biden can have Trump murdered now?



  • Options
    #1541
    crusd
    Registered Users Posts: 1,222 ✭✭✭crusd


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122326442#Comment_122326442

    They do in cases where its "political"



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1542
    Podge_irl
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 26,515 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122326437#Comment_122326437

    Given they were happy to point out what were definitely official acts you'd think they would have been able to point out that these obviously aren't 🙄



  • Options
    #1543
    Quin_Dub
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 15,442 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122326437#Comment_122326437

    So , the lower court will say that they aren't official acts and Trump will appeal and we'll be back on the same treadmill and the cases will go nowhere any time soon.



  • Options
    #1544
    uptherebels
    Registered Users Posts: 1,600 ✭✭✭uptherebels


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122326477#Comment_122326477

    Every topic has been politicised is the US. So every case is political



  • Options
    #1545
    odyssey06
    Registered Users Posts: 29,356 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122326486#Comment_122326486

    I know, can't believe that didn't give some indication, and yet… predictable of them.

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Options
    #1546
    duploelabs
    Registered Users Posts: 11,262 ✭✭✭✭duploelabs


    Taking and then evading a search for classified documents cannot be declared official acts as he'd left office by then. So the case can go ahead (albeit at Canon's slow pace)

    As for the Georgia case, didn't Mark Meadows attempt to challenge the case saying that his actions were official actions, yet was rebuffed in his attempt. So the Georgia case can go ahead.

    As for the Jan 6th case, I presume what constitutes an official act will be a cornerstone to the arguments made in court.

    The resending this back to the individual courts is a loss for Trump as his delaying tactics have run out, he'd better hope he wins this election because the clock has run out, and that's not to say some of them can now progress even before November



  • Options
    #1547
    duploelabs
    Registered Users Posts: 11,262 ✭✭✭✭duploelabs


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122326490#Comment_122326490

    He can't appeal now though, he's swung and missed, you don't get a mulligan



  • Options
    #1548
    duploelabs
    Registered Users Posts: 11,262 ✭✭✭✭duploelabs


    Not now as trump isn't president, however Biden could kill Trump presently



  • Options
    #1549
    hynesie08
    Registered Users Posts: 9,766 ✭✭✭hynesie08


    With this ruling, and trumps declaration he'd be a dictator from day 1, couldn't Biden have him assassinated and get away with it?



  • Options
    #1550
    Quin_Dub
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 15,442 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122326548#Comment_122326548

    Appeal may be the wrong legal term , but he'll delay delay delay with motions and filings etc. etc.

    They've just said that the lower court can decide what's "Official" for those two questions. Trump can disagree with their rulings and appeal on the basis of some ridiculous interpretation of some completely unconnected precedent as he has done before , they'll fail but it will take weeks/months to get through the process of telling him that he has no legal basis for it



  • Options
    #1551
    PropJoe10
    Registered Users Posts: 5,298 ✭✭✭PropJoe10


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122326573#Comment_122326573

    It seems likely, as Biden could declare Trump a danger to the country and therefore it'd be an "official act". The US is a banana republic and undoubtedly on its way to a pretty dark and dystopian future.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1552
    Manic Moran
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 16,315 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122325431#Comment_122325431

    OK, my error. In which case, how does it differ from the majority's practical usage of the word 'rewarded'?



  • Options
    #1553
    Patrick2010
    Registered Users Posts: 3,168 ✭✭✭Patrick2010


    what’s with this from Trump, fake or not? Comments from the Q nuts are funny

    https://x.com/shadowofezra/status/1807555259377635567?s=46&t=I5Ng64p4m8u3ocgC9fbhIA



  • Options
    #1554
    Patrick2010
    Registered Users Posts: 3,168 ✭✭✭Patrick2010


    Does the ruling mean Biden can now sack the conservative judges and replace them with Democrats?



  • Options
    #1555
    Quin_Dub
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 15,442 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122326778#Comment_122326778

    Certainly that would seem to be the case - it would appear that as long as Biden followed the required procedure to have Trump declared "a threat to National security" he could do it and have him renditioned off somewhere never to be seen again.

    Basically it would seem that as long as a President frames any action as "Official" and they have enough of the Senate onside to block impeachment , they can now do pretty much whatever they want.



  • Options
    #1556
    aloyisious
    Registered Users Posts: 11,626 ✭✭✭✭aloyisious


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122326827#Comment_122326827

    He'll probably comment on his media site on the USSC ruling so I'd go there for the "truth".

    Edited around the word truth.



  • Options
    #1557
    Patrick2010
    Registered Users Posts: 3,168 ✭✭✭Patrick2010


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122326850#Comment_122326850

    Don’t you need a truth social account?



  • Options
    #1558
    aloyisious
    Registered Users Posts: 11,626 ✭✭✭✭aloyisious


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122326876#Comment_122326876

    I don't know. The news media sites will re-publish/broadcast on whatever he says [generally verbatim] anyway.



  • Options
    #1559
    rossie1977
    Registered Users Posts: 11,350 ✭✭✭✭rossie1977


    What an absolute laughable decision by the Supreme Court but then many of us saw this coming from moment Garland was denied his rightful place. Republicans have been playing the long game to turn the US into a conservative autocracy since Nixon was ousted.

    Democrats should call the Supreme courts bluff and label Trump a threat to national security and have him arrested and barred from upcoming election now. They won't but they should.



  • Options
    #1560
    aloyisious
    Registered Users Posts: 11,626 ✭✭✭✭aloyisious


    The Supreme Court issued a 9-0 decision in a major social media censorship case dealing a blow to GOP-led states. The Republican-led states of Texas and Florida passed law to restrain Big Tech giants from moderating 'objectionable' material on their platforms.

    The states argued that the social media companies unlawfully tampered the free speech of users, particularly with conservative posts. The tech companies, on the other hand, said that the laws improperly limited their ability to exert 'editorial discretion' over the content on their sites.

    Justice Elena Kagan wrote the majority opinion which puts the Republican states' social media laws on ice until the cases snake back through the court system. 'A State cannot prohibit speech to rebalance the speech market. That unadorned interest is not 'unrelated to the suppression of free expression,'' the court ruled Monday in the opinion by liberal Justice Elena Kagan.

    Funny thing about this is that it [probably] means that "Truth Social" can't be interfered with or have what Trump publishes infringed on by state laws.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1561
    Agent Coulson
    Registered Users Posts: 60,546 ✭✭✭✭Agent Coulson


    Biden should have SEAL Team 6 take out the Conservative justices now since they have given him immunity to do so and replace them with his own Judges that can then revoke the ruling.



Advertisement