455

Biden Campaign Brushes Off Idea of Reforming the Supreme Court (www.rollingstone.com)

submitted 1 week ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

247 comments fedilink hide all child comments

On Monday, the Supreme Court ruled that American presidents have “absolute immunity” from prosecution for any “official acts” they take while in office. For President Joe Biden, this should be great news. Suddenly a host of previously unthinkable options have opened up to him: He could dispatch Seal Team 6 to Mar-A-Lago with orders to neutralize the “primary threat to freedom and democracy” in the United States. He could issue an edict that all digital or physical evidence of his debate performance last week be destroyed. Or he could just use this chilling partisan decision, the latest 6-3 ruling in a term that was characterized by a staggering number of them, as an opportunity to finally embrace the movement to reform the Supreme Court.

But Biden is not planning to do any of that. Shortly after the Supreme Court delivered its decision in Trump v. The United States, the Biden campaign held a press call with surrogates, including Harry Dunn, a Capitol police officer who was on duty the day Trump supporters stormed the building on Jan. 6; Reps. Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.) and Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas); and deputy campaign manager Quentin Fulks.

Their message was simple: It’s terrifying to contemplate what Donald Trump might do with these powers if he’s reelected.

“We have to do everything in our power to stop him,” Fulks said.

Everything, that is, except take material action to rein in the increasingly lawless and openly right-wing Supreme Court.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] [email protected] 88 points 1 week ago

It's astonishing that a man of his age is still flexible enough to stick his head up his own ass. He still thinks he can work with conservatives, doesn't he?

[-] [email protected] 16 points 1 week ago

Dems have to be in on it, that's the only thing that makes sense. It isn't Dem vs. Rep, it's rich vs. poor :(

[-] [email protected] 15 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

When it comes to politics there is one golden rule that explains everything:

Never attribute to stupidity what can be attributed to malice.

[-] [email protected] 14 points 1 week ago

I hate when people use the original version of that rule because it's never a good lense. The original should be 'Never attribute to stupidity what can be attributed to profit', or do people really think the world is run by idiots who just accidentally managed to profit off of every single time things got worse.

[-] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

They always say the same. "Oops we did massive war crimes in Korea and Afghanistan and Iraq and oopsie we're doing a Genocide in Gaza! It was all with the best of intentions we're just so clumsy haha!"

[-] [email protected] 7 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I want the power Obama had. The power to overthrow an entire nation based on nothing but economic fears and leave in it's place an open air slave state, then have people who claim to not like war think your biggest scandal is the color of your damn suit. Just doing an oopsie in Libya, whoopsie daisy.

[-] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago

What were the war crimes in Korea? I would have thought Vietnam would be an easier example. Though admittedly I don't know much about the Korean war.

[-] [email protected] 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

The Korean war is weirdly never really mentioned. It was a lot like Vietnam but more at the beginning of the cold war. We did an amazing amount of war crimes. Napalm was really hot back then (badum ts)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_North_Korea

Air forces of the United Nations Command carried out an extensive bombing campaign against North Korea from 1950 to 1953 during the Korean War. It was the first major bombing campaign for the United States Air Force (USAF) since its inception in 1947 from the United States Army Air Forces. During the campaign, conventional weapons such as explosives, incendiary bombs, and napalm destroyed nearly all of the country's cities and towns, including an estimated 85% of its buildings.[1]

A total of 635,000 tons of bombs, including 32,557 tons of napalm, were dropped on Korea.[2] By comparison, the U.S. dropped 1.6 million tons in the European theater and 500,000 tons in the Pacific theater during all of World War II (including 160,000 on Japan). North Korea ranks alongside Cambodia (500,000 tons), Laos (2 million tons), and South Vietnam (4 million tons) as among the most heavily-bombed countries in history.[3]

We just see Kim Jong Un waving with his ballistic missiles and thinking he's a funny crazy man that hates America for no reason. That's the magic of telling one side of history.

this post was submitted on 03 Jul 2024

455 points (94.0% liked)

politics

18138 readers

3684 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News