Perhaps America’s greatest news story is Trump’s attempt to have the Supreme Court rule that he is immune from criminal prosecution because he was president at the time he committed the alleged crimes. Most of us view this as absurd, but let’s examine the subject more closely.
U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, who was randomly assigned to the federal criminal case accusing Donald Trump of conspiring to obstruct the 2020 election, has ruled that “presidents are not kings,” and therefore Trump had no special privilege to commit any crimes he wished with impunity.
Now, special prosecutor Jack Smith has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to make a ruling here, even though such a request “leap-frogs” the case over an appellate court.
Former federal prosecutor and legal analysts Glenn Kirscher makes a point that, IMO, explains why Trump’s assertion is, in fact, absurd: If the Supreme Court agrees with Trump, they are making the statement that they are not a co-equal branch of government as specified in the U.S. Constitution. If Trump were to be reelected, he could, if he wished, simply disband the high court.
This is the type of political criminality that defines so-called “banana republics,” i.e., their executives somehow attain absolute power, and then immediately wield that power to pound their judiciaries and legislative bodies (not to mention political opponents) into insignificance. Regardless of how conservative the nine-judge panel may be, they will not vote to set aside the Constitution so as to catapult Donald Trump to a position of leadership enjoyed by Kim Jong Un and the world’s other sociopathic dictators.
Why Trump’s Appeals to U.S. Supreme Court re: Immunity from Prosecution Will Fail
Can’t swear that this is true but hoping so.
We must never forget.
The more visibility and the more frequent reminders we can get on this catastrophe in U.S. history the better.
It’s almost funny when we hear that California is a socialist state, or a police state (due to our environmental restrictions), or that people are leaving in droves to go to Texas or Florida. When I come across people who say this, I wonder: have you ever actually been to California?
Do you know that the garden-variety 3 BR, 2 BA house here lists at about $1.2 million, where, if it were moved to, say, the Midwest, it would be worth perhaps $2500,000? Why do you think that could possibly be? Maybe the law of supply and demand doesn’t apply to the Marxist part of the nation?
Perhaps it’s because Californians are offered fantastic economic opportunities. We develop and implement ideas that improve the lives of everyone on Earth, and that we profit greatly from our undertakings.
Something for the MAGA crowd to consider.
The main way governments create wealth is by educating people so that they can become productive members of society. They also build roads and airports and maintain law and order so that honest businesses can thrive.
Anyone living now who believes that Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos are creating wealth for anyone but themselves is a total fool.
A ton of people bought into the concept expressed here in the mid-20th Century, but no semi-intelligent person today believes that tax breaks for billionaires/trillionaires generates a nickel for the common person.
-
Greenhouse Gases12 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change12 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Renewable Energy9 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year ago
嘉宾来稿：探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测