Shifting Sand
That is the name of chapter 5 in the story I wrote for my mutt Shannon.
The name of the book is “DRINK” and the previous 4 chapters are:
Dezzer
Camel
Locusts
Tent of the Sheik
Every day I recite one or more chapters to her and she listens intently.
Shifting sands is also how you might describe american politics today.
Jill exclaimed, “Very good Joe! You answered all the questions!”, and she handed him a tall milkshake which he accepted with a dulled expression. The small crowd clapped hands and hoo-rahed excitedly and fakely.
At the end of it’s run, democracy has devolved so that any choice is no choice anyone would willingly make as all choices are criminally dismal. Honest people will have nothing to do with any of it and everybody scratches their collective heads, holds their noses and pull the designated lever connected to the threshold of power and wealth.
Some claim it is simple bread and circus for simpletons, mere distraction, while the real story of the world is running full speed in the background. The looting of the serfs and their legacy’s and the manipulation of geographic chess pieces. If the simpletons knew what they dare not know they would revolt to the degree the very mantle would quake. A line to be avoided at all costs.
So how should one live in a land where all roads lead to ancient Rome? Perhaps looking ahead and accustoming oneself to the lifestyle of ancient post-Romans is an idea? Create your own future and live it, and understand that this will soon be the unchosen lifestyle of the rest, they that can adapt.
Urbanists and suburbanists take note, there is no place for you in the future, in the life of an outlaw, in a lawless society. In this sense, society doesn’t mean any specific group of people or geographic location, but rather a mindset, a pathway to tomorrow that is ever changing as circumstances change.
Understand, ALL are now under threat of caging or death by the hands of people in control of technology that can cause reality to twist so that almost anything is possible. The 537 at the top for example. Each was quickly taught, shown the inner sanctum, a glimpse of the belly of the beast, the threat borne by all ticket takers everywhere. Once you take the ticket you can never give it back, ever.
The information on your technology devices are controlled by them and will be whatever they want it to be. You don’t own or possess any of these devices? Yes you do and they will make it so. The only cover is undercover and very gray. This isn’t very hard to see, but you must look. If you don’t look, if you refuse to see, you will never understand…
Casey KlahnJuly 3, 2024, 5:12 AM
Well said.
A lawless society: who has the most hazard in a lawless environment? You nailed it: city folk. Suburbanites. Sux to be them. It’s difficult to imagine what The Code of the West has to offer a God forsaken zombiescape. Out here, we live by it, to some extent. It won’t be that big a transition for us in the countryside when everything goes to hell on a broad scale (if it does).
I watched Red River, a late 40s John Wayne super classic that I’ve been keeping in reserve, like a rare barrel whiskey. I’d seen it possibly 15-20 years before, and so I couldn’t remember the ending. The crib note on it is the Duke is a dangerous man, but he’s the hero. He does things only he would do, and no one dares cross him or it’s right between the eyes. So, in good dramatic fashion, the whole trail crew mutinies against him – the thing no one in their right mind should do. Shit ensues.
Red River is the man or woman you need to be. Dangerous, just unpredictable enough to scare everyone, and be courteous while having a plan to kill everything you see.
I came here today to write about the SCOTUS news, and the good and the bad of it. The good is that everyone Left of the Middle-Right is totally losing their shit over the immunity ruling. That, my friends, is the bouquet on a just uncorked libation. It smells like freudenschade, because the Libs hate that Trump has immunity.
If I am correct, congress has immunity. How many Americans hucking fate congress? Seems like the majority of us. Didn’t the president always have legal immunity? Now recognized, but not just invented out of whole cloth, Trump as ex-pres will be not-liable for many of his legal issues. The %4#@ news makes it seem like the SCOTUS invented it this week! What the fug is impeachment? Impeachment is a congressional kangaroo court in place to politically damage an executive not otherwise liable in the law. The long and the short of it is that the lawfare campaign of FJB is coming to a soon and screeching halt. It’s null and void, and I’ll be dipped if the founders didn’t see it coming.
The case about the mass interference with social media to help Biden in 2020 went badly for the Right. I guess the upshot of that one is that the democrats did collude with Face Book and Twitter, just as sure as you’re standing there. However, it’s so big that the SCOTUS cannot prosecute. Too big to prosecute. Eat that shit sandwich, Trump supporters. The gubmint can do whatever it wants to interfere in the press, as long as it does it large scale. Anyway, that’s my intitial take on that ruling.
Carry on.
ghostsniperJuly 1, 2024, 2:55 PM
Hawk Tuah
========
This is just downright sad.
We don’t have a daughter, but I can emphasize with this dood.
With the supreme courts decision today sotomayor made sure that this is sealed in cement because this is how o’biden will be prosecuted. She is in essence guaranteeing his freedom, covering his tracks now so when the prosecution begins she will yell—-get outta jail card coming–free pass. .
In response to the Supreme Court’s momentous decision ruling that presidents are immune from criminal prosecution for “official” acts, Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson issued blistering dissents. They blasted the reasoning of the six conservative justices who essentially created a new power for presidents. Each contended this decision poses a fundamental threat to American democracy and the rule of law.
This is how Sotomayor put it:
The President of the United States is the most powerful person in the country, and possibly the world. When he uses his official powers in any way, under the majority’s reasoning, he now will be insulated from criminal prosecution. Orders the Navy’s Seal Team 6 to assassinate a political rival? Immune. Organizes a military dissenting coup to hold onto power? Immune. Takes a bribe in exchange for a pardon? Immune. Immune, immune, immune. Let the President violate the law, let him exploit the trappings of his office for personal gain, let him use his official power for evil ends. Because if he knew that he may one day face liability for breaking the law, he might not be as bold and fearless as we would like him to be. That is the majority’s message today.
Jackson made a similar and distressing point:
Thus, even a hypothetical President who admits to having ordered the assassinations of his political rivals or critics, or one who indisputably instigates an unsuccessful coup has a fair shot at getting immunity under the majority’s new Presidential accountability model.
azlibertarianJuly 1, 2024, 10:00 PM
Nope. Nope. Nope. I’m gonna reach into my back pocket and throw my big red BS flag. Nothing that Sotomayor, et. al are saying about this immunity decision is correct.
I’ve mentioned before that I watch Robert Gouveia’s YouTube channel (he being the guy with too many vowels). He does a livestream most days of the week which can run 2 hours, but I have a couple of secrets to watching him. This first is that I watch him on 1.25x speed. The second secret is that he’s one of these livestreamers who wants to thank his subscribers by mentioning their paid comments to him in the livestream. When he gets to this part of his show, I drop out for something else.
But in today’s livestream, he covered this Trump immunity decision. I recommend a watch of it, but I do understand that there are only 24 hours in a day and giving him an hour+ might not be for everyone. Anyway, what Sotomayor, et. al miss in their dissent is YUUGE. The majority decision makes very clear that a President is presumed immune from prosecution for his OFFICIAL acts, and not his UNOFFICIAL acts. I am not a lawyer and don’t play one on the internet, but let’s say a President has the following schedule for tomorrow.
7am. Meet with Chief of Staff to talk about the next week
8am. Meet with Attorney General. Talk about appointments needed for US Attorneys
9am. Meet with HHS Secretary to talk about upcoming changes to Social Security
10am. Meet with Congressional leaders
11am. Meet with some union leaders
12pm. Lunch
1pm. Some Eagle Scouts come in and they want a picture
2pm. Meet with campaign staff about which states would be good for me to visit.
His morning is completely occupied with official business. But meeting with campaign staff is not a function of his office…..it is not “official“.
So Justice Sotomayor, please tell the class where in the list of a President’s OFFICIAL duties, one can find the right to order the killing of a political rival? Where does it say, that as part of his Office, he has an OFFICIAL right to accept a bribe in exchange for a pardon?
The answer, of course, is that a President does not have an “official” right–as in “as part of his Office”–to act in these ways (in other words, “criminally”). Should he act criminally, he is not immune from government or civil legal action. The Majority decision makes this all very clear.
Sotomayor, Kagen and the SCOTUS DEI hire, Brown Jackson are worse than morons. They’re low-information political hacks.
“Wise Latina”, my pale hairy ass.
azlibertarianJuly 1, 2024, 10:29 PM
BTW, you can get a .pdf of the decision here at “Vacated and Remanded, but here is what they held…
“Holding: The nature of presidential power entitles a former president to absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority; he is also entitled to at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts; there is no immunity for unofficial acts.“
ghostsniperJuly 2, 2024, 3:18 AM
Very good az.
But.
Suppose the pres DOES violate the law (order the killing of a political rival) but nobody will prosecute him?
azlibertarianJuly 2, 2024, 9:37 AM
Your question of….
[Does justice exist if]…”the pres DOES violate the law (order the killing of a political rival) but nobody will prosecute him?….
…reminds me of….
If a tree falls in the woods, but nobody is around to hear it, does it make a sound?
However, to answer your question, if no one will prosecute a completely unbound President, then we will have a King and not a President.
But the corollary question also needs to be asked: What if a President (current or former) is tied up with one case after another brought against him from prosecutors (from the opposing party) using the legal system as a punishment instead of to seek justice? I admit to a conservative viewpoint and a pro-Trump position, but IMO, that is where we are today.
Also, this tidbit from the decision looks to me to be very important. From Page 4….
“…In dividing official from unofficial conduct, courts may not inquire into the President’s motives….”
The courts may not look at Trump’s phone call to Georgia’s Raffensperger presuming that Trump’s motive was for him to have Raffensperger keep counting until Trump had enough votes.
And I think that this sentence is a subtle work of genius. Right after Trump was convicted, there was a common viewpoint among the Right that the only way for the Democrats to learn the lesson that prosecuting one’s political opponents was unproductive was for the Republicans, once returned to power, to prosecute the Democrats. Put Biden and Majorkas on trial for failing to close the border. Find a District Attorney or an Attorney General somewhere and prosecute him for failing to adequately prosecute those who violate election law. If the Left has these rules, then let them live by them too.
But here, the Supremes have said that the courts can’t presume an intent in deciding between an official and unofficial act. The immediate and obvious winner of this decision is Trump. His conviction will be overturned, and the remaining charges will fall away. The Right will rejoice at this, and the Left will howl.
But here’s what everyone is missing: This same precept….that a President’s motive can’t be presumed….will keep Biden (and Obama and perhaps all the way back to Clinton) from being prosecuted for their actions too.
That one sentence calms the waters, and I think that that is a good thing.
ghostsniperJuly 2, 2024, 11:17 AM
az sed: “That one sentence calms the waters, and I think that that is a good thing.”
=========
I kinda wish I could believe like you do.
But I believe I am too deeply ruined.
ghostsniperJuly 2, 2024, 11:19 AM
From somewhere outhere:
The democrats always fear monger making up wild ignorant catastrophe that would never happen to control the narrative. There is a zombie in the Whitehouse and they warn of Trump being a dictator who will put contracts on his political enemy. That is just pure prefabricated bull. Trump was in the presidency for 4 years and all he did was to try to make America the world’s leader, control the border, get world wide acceptance through strength, protect American jobs, support Israel, improve minority status, have low inflation, have affordable gas and home loans, protect religious freedoms, etc. Yes he is pompous and self promoting, but much of that was because the media was so against him and for the first two years the GOP was more against him than for him (Paul Ryan fiasco). Somebody had to beat his drum so he did.
The democrats are great at mind control and they make things up to stir up fear so they can claim to be saving us from their imagination. Trump said his revenge would be to be successful. Democrats don’t comprehend that because they think he is like them. If elected watch what happens, he will have successes and smirk at the democrats will drive them looney. He will be so busy straightening things back up so his VP can follow on, he will ignore the democrat contrived and feared revenge which they would exact if given a chance.
Please excuse me for being anonymous, but I’ve a family story to tell. It’s been prompted by some of the recent newsworthy events of the past several weeks.
My father was a well-accomplished and striving man. He had his faults as do we all, but despite them he was able to command enduring loyalty from quite a few people and together they were able to accomplish many wonderful things over the years. My father was a community improver. Like many accomplished and striving men, some of his faults were outrageous as viewed from today’s sensibilities. If back then were now and his faults came to light he would have been cancelled.
In his latter years he began to lose control over his temper, which pushed away many of his loyal friends. He knew this, but couldn’t help it. His friends described him as kind and caring and sharing in his younger years. They counseled him to “make love, not war” in his dealings with everyone, he even admitted to us that they were counseling him thusly, and he was trying. In his final years, he began to do things that I said to myself, “gosh darn it Dad, stop that misbehaving!”, but never to his face, to my shame. One of my brothers was more courageous, and started a huge row with my father about his behavior, with a lifetime’s worth of bitter accusations being flung in both directions. My brother described it as, “all your life you have a voice in your head telling you to do wrong things, and most of the time you say no, but when you get too old you lose the power to say no, and you listen to that voice and do what it tells you.” I read somewhere today that people call it “losing your executive function”.
In his final years, he became erratic and prone to angry outbursts. It happened more and more as time went on. He managed to alienate pretty much everyone, his friends, all his family, my brothers and sisters. With us not around, my mother was often the brunt of his angry screaming fits. Her loyalty to him was legend. Such loyalty no longer exists in today’s world.
He was not senile, descending into forgetfulness. His mother suffered from Alzheimers in her final years. He kept his affairs under control until the very last months. He even knew the end was near, and as much as he was still able he wound up his affairs so his passing wouldn’t be a burden to his wife our mother. He just became increasingly uncivilized until no one could be around him any more, and no one could help him. I heard one of his very dear and long-time friends comment at his funeral that his God-given soul had left his body a few years before his death. When we finally had to go to court and take away his independence and become his guardian, he lost his will to live any longer and quickly declined. I do believe that he willed himself to death once he realized he was no longer the boss of himself.
My brothers and sisters in those last years despised him. In fact, most of my siblings despised him for much longer than that. Most everybody was like that: either a person was extremely loyal to my father and looked past his faults, or they despised him. I had made my peace with how I was raised, and while I was there in the same city as my parents I did what I could to be a good son.
I never talk politics with my siblings, not in many years, I avoid such talk like the plague, but from how I hear them talk amongst themselves, I believe they are of the liberal/progressive/Democratic side of things as was my mother. My father’s politics were more complex, quite a quirky mix of liberal and conservative. He didn’t talk politics much, he was always involved in his activities, so we only heard the odd bits of what he thought on the political questions of the day. Many driven men are like that, they spend all their time and energy on their pursuits and don’t leave much time to think about other things.
I don’t wish to start a big family row, but I found it quite disgusting that I’m sure that my siblings all voted for the current President, when it was quite obvious to me back in 2020 that he was behaving just like my father in his last years. They despised our father, the wounds were fresh, but they voted in lockstep for FJB. So much for family loyalty, it’s nothing compared to political loyalty. I pretty much expect that they will still vote for FJB over the BOM this next time regardless of the undeniable evidence now laid out before them. I so want to rub their noses in it, how they did then and will still now vote for our father whom they despise. But I won’t. I’m not interested in spending any time fighting with them and hearing their justifications. My time on Earth is best spent on better things.
I pray that when my time comes, I will be true to my wife and be better than my father and be able to tell the demon in my head “NO!” all the way to the end.
ghostsniperJuly 3, 2024, 3:32 AM
Good story, I can relate to much of it.
ghostsniperJuly 3, 2024, 7:50 AM
Walt Disney presents….
OLD YELLER!
==========
But inside the White House, Biden’s growing limitations were becoming apparent long before his meltdown in last week’s debate, with the senior team’s management of the president growing more strictly controlled as his term has gone on. During meetings with aides who are putting together formal briefings they’ll deliver to Biden, some senior officials have at times gone to great lengths to curate the information being presented in an effort to avoid provoking a negative reaction.
“It’s like, ‘You can’t include that, that will set him off,’ or ‘Put that in, he likes that,’” said one senior administration official. “It’s a Rorschach test, not a briefing. Because he is not a pleasant person to be around when he’s being briefed. It’s very difficult, and people are scared s**tless of him.”
The official said, “He doesn’t take advice from anyone other than those few top aides, and it becomes a perfect storm because he just gets more and more isolated from their efforts to control it.”
Real World Address for Donations, Mash Notes and Hate Mail
Gerard Van der Leun
1692 MANGROVE AVE
APT 379
Chico, Ca 95926
Green Pants Interior by Klahn
Who Am I? by Carl Sandburg
My head knocks against the stars.
My feet are on the hilltops.
My finger-tips are in the valleys and shores of universal life.
Down in the sounding foam of primal things I reach my hands and play with pebbles of destiny.
I have been to hell and back many times.
I know all about heaven, for I have talked with God.
I dabble in the blood and guts of the terrible.
I know the passionate seizure of beauty
And the marvelous rebellion of man at all signs reading “Keep Off.”
My name is Truth and I am the most elusive captive in the universe.
Duty, Beauty, Liberty, Country, Honor, Family, Faith — Plus a few simple easy to follow rules for guys
Men saw the stars at the edge of the sea
They thought great thoughts about liberty
Poets wrote down words that did fit
Writers wrote books
Thinkers thought about it
Take it where you find it
Can’t leave it alone
You will find a purpose
To carry it on
Mainly when you find it
Your heart will be strong
About it
Many’s the road I have walked upon
Many’s the hour between dusk and dawn
Many’s the time
Many’s the mile
I see it all now
Through the eyes of a child
Take it where you find it
Can’t leave it alone
You will find a purpose
To carry it on
Mainly when you find it
Your heart will be strong
About it
[Chorus]
Lost dreams and found dreams
In America
In America
In America
Lost dreams and found dreams
In America
In America
In America
And close your eyes
Leave it all for a while
Leave the world
And your worries behind
You will build on whatever is real
And wake up each day
To a new waking dream
Take it where you find it
Can’t leave it alone
You will find a purpose
To carry it on
Mainly when you find it
Your heart will be strong
About it
[Chorus]
Change, change come over
Change come over
Talkin’ about a change
Change, change
Change come over, now
Change, change, change come over
I’m gonna walk down the street
Until I see
My shining light
I’m gonna walk down the street
Until I see
My shining light
I’m gonna walk down the street
Until I see
My shining light
I’m gonna walk down the street
Until I see
My shining light
I see my light
See my light
See my shining light
I see my light
See my light
See my shining light
Gerard Van der Leun
Shifting Sand
That is the name of chapter 5 in the story I wrote for my mutt Shannon.
The name of the book is “DRINK” and the previous 4 chapters are:
Dezzer
Camel
Locusts
Tent of the Sheik
Every day I recite one or more chapters to her and she listens intently.
Shifting sands is also how you might describe american politics today.
Jill exclaimed, “Very good Joe! You answered all the questions!”, and she handed him a tall milkshake which he accepted with a dulled expression. The small crowd clapped hands and hoo-rahed excitedly and fakely.
At the end of it’s run, democracy has devolved so that any choice is no choice anyone would willingly make as all choices are criminally dismal. Honest people will have nothing to do with any of it and everybody scratches their collective heads, holds their noses and pull the designated lever connected to the threshold of power and wealth.
Some claim it is simple bread and circus for simpletons, mere distraction, while the real story of the world is running full speed in the background. The looting of the serfs and their legacy’s and the manipulation of geographic chess pieces. If the simpletons knew what they dare not know they would revolt to the degree the very mantle would quake. A line to be avoided at all costs.
So how should one live in a land where all roads lead to ancient Rome? Perhaps looking ahead and accustoming oneself to the lifestyle of ancient post-Romans is an idea? Create your own future and live it, and understand that this will soon be the unchosen lifestyle of the rest, they that can adapt.
Urbanists and suburbanists take note, there is no place for you in the future, in the life of an outlaw, in a lawless society. In this sense, society doesn’t mean any specific group of people or geographic location, but rather a mindset, a pathway to tomorrow that is ever changing as circumstances change.
Understand, ALL are now under threat of caging or death by the hands of people in control of technology that can cause reality to twist so that almost anything is possible. The 537 at the top for example. Each was quickly taught, shown the inner sanctum, a glimpse of the belly of the beast, the threat borne by all ticket takers everywhere. Once you take the ticket you can never give it back, ever.
The information on your technology devices are controlled by them and will be whatever they want it to be. You don’t own or possess any of these devices? Yes you do and they will make it so. The only cover is undercover and very gray. This isn’t very hard to see, but you must look. If you don’t look, if you refuse to see, you will never understand…
Well said.
A lawless society: who has the most hazard in a lawless environment? You nailed it: city folk. Suburbanites. Sux to be them. It’s difficult to imagine what The Code of the West has to offer a God forsaken zombiescape. Out here, we live by it, to some extent. It won’t be that big a transition for us in the countryside when everything goes to hell on a broad scale (if it does).
I watched Red River, a late 40s John Wayne super classic that I’ve been keeping in reserve, like a rare barrel whiskey. I’d seen it possibly 15-20 years before, and so I couldn’t remember the ending. The crib note on it is the Duke is a dangerous man, but he’s the hero. He does things only he would do, and no one dares cross him or it’s right between the eyes. So, in good dramatic fashion, the whole trail crew mutinies against him – the thing no one in their right mind should do. Shit ensues.
Red River is the man or woman you need to be. Dangerous, just unpredictable enough to scare everyone, and be courteous while having a plan to kill everything you see.
I came here today to write about the SCOTUS news, and the good and the bad of it. The good is that everyone Left of the Middle-Right is totally losing their shit over the immunity ruling. That, my friends, is the bouquet on a just uncorked libation. It smells like freudenschade, because the Libs hate that Trump has immunity.
If I am correct, congress has immunity. How many Americans hucking fate congress? Seems like the majority of us. Didn’t the president always have legal immunity? Now recognized, but not just invented out of whole cloth, Trump as ex-pres will be not-liable for many of his legal issues. The %4#@ news makes it seem like the SCOTUS invented it this week! What the fug is impeachment? Impeachment is a congressional kangaroo court in place to politically damage an executive not otherwise liable in the law. The long and the short of it is that the lawfare campaign of FJB is coming to a soon and screeching halt. It’s null and void, and I’ll be dipped if the founders didn’t see it coming.
The case about the mass interference with social media to help Biden in 2020 went badly for the Right. I guess the upshot of that one is that the democrats did collude with Face Book and Twitter, just as sure as you’re standing there. However, it’s so big that the SCOTUS cannot prosecute. Too big to prosecute. Eat that shit sandwich, Trump supporters. The gubmint can do whatever it wants to interfere in the press, as long as it does it large scale. Anyway, that’s my intitial take on that ruling.
Carry on.
Hawk Tuah
========
This is just downright sad.
We don’t have a daughter, but I can emphasize with this dood.
https://www.instagram.com/dave.landau/reel/C8iJi37O9Yw/
With the supreme courts decision today sotomayor made sure that this is sealed in cement because this is how o’biden will be prosecuted. She is in essence guaranteeing his freedom, covering his tracks now so when the prosecution begins she will yell—-get outta jail card coming–free pass. .
In response to the Supreme Court’s momentous decision ruling that presidents are immune from criminal prosecution for “official” acts, Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson issued blistering dissents. They blasted the reasoning of the six conservative justices who essentially created a new power for presidents. Each contended this decision poses a fundamental threat to American democracy and the rule of law.
This is how Sotomayor put it:
The President of the United States is the most powerful person in the country, and possibly the world. When he uses his official powers in any way, under the majority’s reasoning, he now will be insulated from criminal prosecution. Orders the Navy’s Seal Team 6 to assassinate a political rival? Immune. Organizes a military dissenting coup to hold onto power? Immune. Takes a bribe in exchange for a pardon? Immune. Immune, immune, immune. Let the President violate the law, let him exploit the trappings of his office for personal gain, let him use his official power for evil ends. Because if he knew that he may one day face liability for breaking the law, he might not be as bold and fearless as we would like him to be. That is the majority’s message today.
Jackson made a similar and distressing point:
Thus, even a hypothetical President who admits to having ordered the assassinations of his political rivals or critics, or one who indisputably instigates an unsuccessful coup has a fair shot at getting immunity under the majority’s new Presidential accountability model.
Nope. Nope. Nope. I’m gonna reach into my back pocket and throw my big red BS flag. Nothing that Sotomayor, et. al are saying about this immunity decision is correct.
I’ve mentioned before that I watch Robert Gouveia’s YouTube channel (he being the guy with too many vowels). He does a livestream most days of the week which can run 2 hours, but I have a couple of secrets to watching him. This first is that I watch him on 1.25x speed. The second secret is that he’s one of these livestreamers who wants to thank his subscribers by mentioning their paid comments to him in the livestream. When he gets to this part of his show, I drop out for something else.
But in today’s livestream, he covered this Trump immunity decision. I recommend a watch of it, but I do understand that there are only 24 hours in a day and giving him an hour+ might not be for everyone. Anyway, what Sotomayor, et. al miss in their dissent is YUUGE. The majority decision makes very clear that a President is presumed immune from prosecution for his OFFICIAL acts, and not his UNOFFICIAL acts. I am not a lawyer and don’t play one on the internet, but let’s say a President has the following schedule for tomorrow.
7am. Meet with Chief of Staff to talk about the next week
8am. Meet with Attorney General. Talk about appointments needed for US Attorneys
9am. Meet with HHS Secretary to talk about upcoming changes to Social Security
10am. Meet with Congressional leaders
11am. Meet with some union leaders
12pm. Lunch
1pm. Some Eagle Scouts come in and they want a picture
2pm. Meet with campaign staff about which states would be good for me to visit.
His morning is completely occupied with official business. But meeting with campaign staff is not a function of his office…..it is not “official“.
So Justice Sotomayor, please tell the class where in the list of a President’s OFFICIAL duties, one can find the right to order the killing of a political rival? Where does it say, that as part of his Office, he has an OFFICIAL right to accept a bribe in exchange for a pardon?
The answer, of course, is that a President does not have an “official” right–as in “as part of his Office”–to act in these ways (in other words, “criminally”). Should he act criminally, he is not immune from government or civil legal action. The Majority decision makes this all very clear.
Sotomayor, Kagen and the SCOTUS DEI hire, Brown Jackson are worse than morons. They’re low-information political hacks.
“Wise Latina”, my pale hairy ass.
BTW, you can get a .pdf of the decision here at “Vacated and Remanded, but here is what they held…
“Holding: The nature of presidential power entitles a former president to absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority; he is also entitled to at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts; there is no immunity for unofficial acts.“
Very good az.
But.
Suppose the pres DOES violate the law (order the killing of a political rival) but nobody will prosecute him?
Your question of….
[Does justice exist if]…”the pres DOES violate the law (order the killing of a political rival) but nobody will prosecute him?….
…reminds me of….
If a tree falls in the woods, but nobody is around to hear it, does it make a sound?
However, to answer your question, if no one will prosecute a completely unbound President, then we will have a King and not a President.
But the corollary question also needs to be asked: What if a President (current or former) is tied up with one case after another brought against him from prosecutors (from the opposing party) using the legal system as a punishment instead of to seek justice? I admit to a conservative viewpoint and a pro-Trump position, but IMO, that is where we are today.
Also, this tidbit from the decision looks to me to be very important. From Page 4….
“…In dividing official from unofficial conduct, courts may not inquire into the President’s motives….”
The courts may not look at Trump’s phone call to Georgia’s Raffensperger presuming that Trump’s motive was for him to have Raffensperger keep counting until Trump had enough votes.
And I think that this sentence is a subtle work of genius. Right after Trump was convicted, there was a common viewpoint among the Right that the only way for the Democrats to learn the lesson that prosecuting one’s political opponents was unproductive was for the Republicans, once returned to power, to prosecute the Democrats. Put Biden and Majorkas on trial for failing to close the border. Find a District Attorney or an Attorney General somewhere and prosecute him for failing to adequately prosecute those who violate election law. If the Left has these rules, then let them live by them too.
But here, the Supremes have said that the courts can’t presume an intent in deciding between an official and unofficial act. The immediate and obvious winner of this decision is Trump. His conviction will be overturned, and the remaining charges will fall away. The Right will rejoice at this, and the Left will howl.
But here’s what everyone is missing: This same precept….that a President’s motive can’t be presumed….will keep Biden (and Obama and perhaps all the way back to Clinton) from being prosecuted for their actions too.
That one sentence calms the waters, and I think that that is a good thing.
az sed: “That one sentence calms the waters, and I think that that is a good thing.”
=========
I kinda wish I could believe like you do.
But I believe I am too deeply ruined.
From somewhere outhere:
The democrats always fear monger making up wild ignorant catastrophe that would never happen to control the narrative. There is a zombie in the Whitehouse and they warn of Trump being a dictator who will put contracts on his political enemy. That is just pure prefabricated bull. Trump was in the presidency for 4 years and all he did was to try to make America the world’s leader, control the border, get world wide acceptance through strength, protect American jobs, support Israel, improve minority status, have low inflation, have affordable gas and home loans, protect religious freedoms, etc. Yes he is pompous and self promoting, but much of that was because the media was so against him and for the first two years the GOP was more against him than for him (Paul Ryan fiasco). Somebody had to beat his drum so he did.
The democrats are great at mind control and they make things up to stir up fear so they can claim to be saving us from their imagination. Trump said his revenge would be to be successful. Democrats don’t comprehend that because they think he is like them. If elected watch what happens, he will have successes and smirk at the democrats will drive them looney. He will be so busy straightening things back up so his VP can follow on, he will ignore the democrat contrived and feared revenge which they would exact if given a chance.
“Sharp as a tack” LOL
https://x.com/0rf/status/1807620571934478683
Please excuse me for being anonymous, but I’ve a family story to tell. It’s been prompted by some of the recent newsworthy events of the past several weeks.
My father was a well-accomplished and striving man. He had his faults as do we all, but despite them he was able to command enduring loyalty from quite a few people and together they were able to accomplish many wonderful things over the years. My father was a community improver. Like many accomplished and striving men, some of his faults were outrageous as viewed from today’s sensibilities. If back then were now and his faults came to light he would have been cancelled.
In his latter years he began to lose control over his temper, which pushed away many of his loyal friends. He knew this, but couldn’t help it. His friends described him as kind and caring and sharing in his younger years. They counseled him to “make love, not war” in his dealings with everyone, he even admitted to us that they were counseling him thusly, and he was trying. In his final years, he began to do things that I said to myself, “gosh darn it Dad, stop that misbehaving!”, but never to his face, to my shame. One of my brothers was more courageous, and started a huge row with my father about his behavior, with a lifetime’s worth of bitter accusations being flung in both directions. My brother described it as, “all your life you have a voice in your head telling you to do wrong things, and most of the time you say no, but when you get too old you lose the power to say no, and you listen to that voice and do what it tells you.” I read somewhere today that people call it “losing your executive function”.
In his final years, he became erratic and prone to angry outbursts. It happened more and more as time went on. He managed to alienate pretty much everyone, his friends, all his family, my brothers and sisters. With us not around, my mother was often the brunt of his angry screaming fits. Her loyalty to him was legend. Such loyalty no longer exists in today’s world.
He was not senile, descending into forgetfulness. His mother suffered from Alzheimers in her final years. He kept his affairs under control until the very last months. He even knew the end was near, and as much as he was still able he wound up his affairs so his passing wouldn’t be a burden to his wife our mother. He just became increasingly uncivilized until no one could be around him any more, and no one could help him. I heard one of his very dear and long-time friends comment at his funeral that his God-given soul had left his body a few years before his death. When we finally had to go to court and take away his independence and become his guardian, he lost his will to live any longer and quickly declined. I do believe that he willed himself to death once he realized he was no longer the boss of himself.
My brothers and sisters in those last years despised him. In fact, most of my siblings despised him for much longer than that. Most everybody was like that: either a person was extremely loyal to my father and looked past his faults, or they despised him. I had made my peace with how I was raised, and while I was there in the same city as my parents I did what I could to be a good son.
I never talk politics with my siblings, not in many years, I avoid such talk like the plague, but from how I hear them talk amongst themselves, I believe they are of the liberal/progressive/Democratic side of things as was my mother. My father’s politics were more complex, quite a quirky mix of liberal and conservative. He didn’t talk politics much, he was always involved in his activities, so we only heard the odd bits of what he thought on the political questions of the day. Many driven men are like that, they spend all their time and energy on their pursuits and don’t leave much time to think about other things.
I don’t wish to start a big family row, but I found it quite disgusting that I’m sure that my siblings all voted for the current President, when it was quite obvious to me back in 2020 that he was behaving just like my father in his last years. They despised our father, the wounds were fresh, but they voted in lockstep for FJB. So much for family loyalty, it’s nothing compared to political loyalty. I pretty much expect that they will still vote for FJB over the BOM this next time regardless of the undeniable evidence now laid out before them. I so want to rub their noses in it, how they did then and will still now vote for our father whom they despise. But I won’t. I’m not interested in spending any time fighting with them and hearing their justifications. My time on Earth is best spent on better things.
I pray that when my time comes, I will be true to my wife and be better than my father and be able to tell the demon in my head “NO!” all the way to the end.
Good story, I can relate to much of it.
Walt Disney presents….
OLD YELLER!
==========
But inside the White House, Biden’s growing limitations were becoming apparent long before his meltdown in last week’s debate, with the senior team’s management of the president growing more strictly controlled as his term has gone on. During meetings with aides who are putting together formal briefings they’ll deliver to Biden, some senior officials have at times gone to great lengths to curate the information being presented in an effort to avoid provoking a negative reaction.
“It’s like, ‘You can’t include that, that will set him off,’ or ‘Put that in, he likes that,’” said one senior administration official. “It’s a Rorschach test, not a briefing. Because he is not a pleasant person to be around when he’s being briefed. It’s very difficult, and people are scared s**tless of him.”
The official said, “He doesn’t take advice from anyone other than those few top aides, and it becomes a perfect storm because he just gets more and more isolated from their efforts to control it.”
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/rebeccadowns/2024/07/02/politico-on-how-scared-people-are-of-biden-n2641283