Home | Community | Message Board


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Kraken Kratom Shop: Red Vein Kratom

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2  [ show all ]
Onlinelifeiswhatyoumake
Trance in my sig n blood
Male User Gallery


Registered: 09/30/11
Posts: 16,709
Last seen: 3 minutes, 18 seconds
US Supreme Court rejects Jack Smith’s request for justices to quickly hear Trump immunity dispute
    #28594107 - 12/22/23 01:27 PM (1 month, 5 days ago)

Why would the SC reject Jack Smith's request to quickly hear this presidential immunity dispute? 

"The court did not explain its reasoning and there were no noted dissents."

So every Justice voted to reject.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/22/politics/supreme-court-trump-immunity-jack-smith/index.html


--------------------
:rave::rave::rave: I dropped a trance track "Peace Love & Trance": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4uQBM-mRYU ; :raver2::raver2::raver2::raveface:


Edited by lifeiswhatyoumake (12/22/23 02:15 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleNillion
Nobody

Registered: 04/14/22
Posts: 1,000
Loc: Terra Firma
Re: US Supreme Court rejects Jack Smith’s request for justices to quickly hear Trump immunity dispute [Re: lifeiswhatyoumake]
    #28594116 - 12/22/23 01:37 PM (1 month, 5 days ago)

This was right after Trumps council asked them to do just this, with the argument that it prevents lower courts from weighing in, as it were.

The timing appears to indicate that the Court agreed, regardless of the silence upon the matter. This allows lower courts to deal with it for now.

However there is federal court precedent for sovereign immunity that is not based on the Constitution. The case involving the Ruby Ridge sniper, for example. This would indicate that Trump cannot be prosecuted even when his acts were outside the scope of his official duties and were considered factually criminal for any citizen. It is an interesting case to watch. The origin of Sovereign Immunity in our court system is prior to the Declaration of Independence, back when the Crown was the highest judicial authority. Many of our legal aspects were inherited thus. Except those silly wigs.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineThe Ecstatic
Chilldog Extraordinaire


Registered: 11/11/09
Posts: 33,357
Loc: 'Merica
Last seen: 9 hours, 30 minutes
Re: US Supreme Court rejects Jack Smith’s request for justices to quickly hear Trump immunity dispute [Re: lifeiswhatyoumake] * 1
    #28595022 - 12/23/23 08:22 AM (1 month, 4 days ago)

Don’t like how the unelected Wise Ones interpreted the seer stones? Vote harder.


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEnlilMDiscord
OTD God-King
 User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,470
Loc: Uncanny Valley
Re: US Supreme Court rejects Jack Smith’s request for justices to quickly hear Trump immunity dispute [Re: lifeiswhatyoumake]
    #28596328 - 12/24/23 08:39 AM (1 month, 3 days ago)

There's nothing shocking about this, though.  It would be shocking if the Supremes did jump in line before the court of appeals.


--------------------
Censoring opposing views since 2014.

Ask an Attorney

Fuck the Amish


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineCHeifM4sterDiezL
Chief Globerts

Registered: 07/28/10
Posts: 22,529
Loc: United States Flag
Last seen: 1 hour, 4 minutes
Re: US Supreme Court rejects Jack Smith’s request for justices to quickly hear Trump immunity dispute [Re: Enlil]
    #28596369 - 12/24/23 09:07 AM (1 month, 3 days ago)

What people don't get and it's so frustrating is that even if there is sovereign immunity it's only for A.) A sitting president B.) only for things considered to be withing the scope of duty of the office of President. It was never intended to make the president totally above the law and its never been used that way. Like I said that nixon v Fitzgerald ruling (which was actually used to fuck over people in favor of nixon) I talked about in the other thread really lays it all out pretty clear and was expounded on in later rulings. Basically like I said he's only immune from things done in the duty of president when they're president doing something as blatantly illegal like doing insurrection stuff or interfering with the constitutionally guaranteed transfer of power obviously falls just a bit out of bounds of presidential duties :facepalm:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEnlilMDiscord
OTD God-King
 User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,470
Loc: Uncanny Valley
Re: US Supreme Court rejects Jack Smith’s request for justices to quickly hear Trump immunity dispute [Re: CHeifM4sterDiezL]
    #28596410 - 12/24/23 09:54 AM (1 month, 3 days ago)

You're incorrect.


--------------------
Censoring opposing views since 2014.

Ask an Attorney

Fuck the Amish


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineCHeifM4sterDiezL
Chief Globerts

Registered: 07/28/10
Posts: 22,529
Loc: United States Flag
Last seen: 1 hour, 4 minutes
Re: US Supreme Court rejects Jack Smith’s request for justices to quickly hear Trump immunity dispute [Re: Enlil]
    #28596413 - 12/24/23 10:00 AM (1 month, 3 days ago)

Well judging by the fact that you've given no evidence to the contrary I'm going to assume that your not a constitutional law scholar.:facepalm:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEnlilMDiscord
OTD God-King
 User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,470
Loc: Uncanny Valley
Re: US Supreme Court rejects Jack Smith’s request for justices to quickly hear Trump immunity dispute [Re: CHeifM4sterDiezL]
    #28596427 - 12/24/23 10:08 AM (1 month, 3 days ago)

You gave no evidence for your claims. Why would you expect me to show you contradictory evidence?  If you believe that sovereign immunity only applies to the president, support that claim?  Otherwise, you're just some rando on the internet making wild claims.


--------------------
Censoring opposing views since 2014.

Ask an Attorney

Fuck the Amish


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineCHeifM4sterDiezL
Chief Globerts

Registered: 07/28/10
Posts: 22,529
Loc: United States Flag
Last seen: 1 hour, 4 minutes
Re: US Supreme Court rejects Jack Smith’s request for justices to quickly hear Trump immunity dispute [Re: Enlil]
    #28596465 - 12/24/23 10:34 AM (1 month, 3 days ago)

I said that it would only apply to actions of a sitting president and only to actions that were with in the "outer parameter" of the scope of thier duties and that relate closely to the immunity's justifying purposes. Are you really going to argue trump trying to over throw an election is justified and within the outer parameter of his duties? How is immunity applied in other cases? When has it ever been used as a free pass to do blatant crimes or violations :strokebeard:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEnlilMDiscord
OTD God-King
 User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,470
Loc: Uncanny Valley
Re: US Supreme Court rejects Jack Smith’s request for justices to quickly hear Trump immunity dispute [Re: CHeifM4sterDiezL]
    #28596469 - 12/24/23 10:36 AM (1 month, 3 days ago)

And where is your evidence that it only applies to actions of a president?


--------------------
Censoring opposing views since 2014.

Ask an Attorney

Fuck the Amish


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineCHeifM4sterDiezL
Chief Globerts

Registered: 07/28/10
Posts: 22,529
Loc: United States Flag
Last seen: 1 hour, 4 minutes
Re: US Supreme Court rejects Jack Smith’s request for justices to quickly hear Trump immunity dispute [Re: Enlil]
    #28596489 - 12/24/23 11:05 AM (1 month, 3 days ago)

Well only the President can claim presidential immunity even a child could figure that out. It's only applied to sitting presidents for acts done in office and actions related to the duty of President see Clinton v Jones as that's the only logical and justified way to apply them. Again even a child could see that :facepalm:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEnlilMDiscord
OTD God-King
 User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,470
Loc: Uncanny Valley
Re: US Supreme Court rejects Jack Smith’s request for justices to quickly hear Trump immunity dispute [Re: CHeifM4sterDiezL]
    #28596494 - 12/24/23 11:09 AM (1 month, 3 days ago)

Why are you moving the goalposts? You were talking about sovereign immunity... not presidential immunity.


--------------------
Censoring opposing views since 2014.

Ask an Attorney

Fuck the Amish


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineCHeifM4sterDiezL
Chief Globerts

Registered: 07/28/10
Posts: 22,529
Loc: United States Flag
Last seen: 1 hour, 4 minutes
Re: US Supreme Court rejects Jack Smith’s request for justices to quickly hear Trump immunity dispute [Re: Enlil]
    #28596505 - 12/24/23 11:26 AM (1 month, 3 days ago)

Well the president is the only thing close to a sovereign we have :facepalm:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEnlilMDiscord
OTD God-King
 User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,470
Loc: Uncanny Valley
Re: US Supreme Court rejects Jack Smith’s request for justices to quickly hear Trump immunity dispute [Re: CHeifM4sterDiezL]
    #28596511 - 12/24/23 11:30 AM (1 month, 3 days ago)

We have 51 separate sovereigns in this nation, each of which include multiple people. :facepalm:


--------------------
Censoring opposing views since 2014.

Ask an Attorney

Fuck the Amish


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineCHeifM4sterDiezL
Chief Globerts

Registered: 07/28/10
Posts: 22,529
Loc: United States Flag
Last seen: 1 hour, 4 minutes
Re: US Supreme Court rejects Jack Smith’s request for justices to quickly hear Trump immunity dispute [Re: Enlil]
    #28596518 - 12/24/23 11:36 AM (1 month, 3 days ago)

We're all sovereigns and then we elect officers to do the duties of that office that's it end of story!


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineBrian Jones
Club 27
Male User Gallery


Registered: 12/18/12
Posts: 12,340
Loc: attending Snake Church
Last seen: 1 day, 3 hours
Re: US Supreme Court rejects Jack Smith’s request for justices to quickly hear Trump immunity dispute [Re: Enlil] * 1
    #28596522 - 12/24/23 11:38 AM (1 month, 3 days ago)

Lady Sovereign



--------------------
"The Rolling Stones will break up over Brian Jones' dead body"    John Lennon

I don't want no commies in my car. No Christians either.

The worst thing about corruption is that it works so well,


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineCHeifM4sterDiezL
Chief Globerts

Registered: 07/28/10
Posts: 22,529
Loc: United States Flag
Last seen: 1 hour, 4 minutes
Re: US Supreme Court rejects Jack Smith’s request for justices to quickly hear Trump immunity dispute [Re: Brian Jones]
    #28596524 - 12/24/23 11:41 AM (1 month, 3 days ago)

:trees::aliendance::trees:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Onlinelifeiswhatyoumake
Trance in my sig n blood
Male User Gallery


Registered: 09/30/11
Posts: 16,709
Last seen: 3 minutes, 18 seconds
Re: US Supreme Court rejects Jack Smith’s request for justices to quickly hear Trump immunity dispute [Re: Enlil]
    #28596568 - 12/24/23 12:49 PM (1 month, 3 days ago)

Quote:

Enlil said:
There's nothing shocking about this, though.  It would be shocking if the Supremes did jump in line before the court of appeals.





You probably know more about this than me, but from my point of view, this seems like something so important to our country's well-being that it should be concluded by the highest court in the land ASAP so we can get back to being a country that puts all its resources into governing for the people.


--------------------
:rave::rave::rave: I dropped a trance track "Peace Love & Trance": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4uQBM-mRYU ; :raver2::raver2::raver2::raveface:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEnlilMDiscord
OTD God-King
 User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,470
Loc: Uncanny Valley
Re: US Supreme Court rejects Jack Smith’s request for justices to quickly hear Trump immunity dispute [Re: lifeiswhatyoumake]
    #28596576 - 12/24/23 12:59 PM (1 month, 3 days ago)

How does this issue relate to that? It appears to me that this is about a criminal prosecution.


--------------------
Censoring opposing views since 2014.

Ask an Attorney

Fuck the Amish


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Onlinelifeiswhatyoumake
Trance in my sig n blood
Male User Gallery


Registered: 09/30/11
Posts: 16,709
Last seen: 3 minutes, 18 seconds
Re: US Supreme Court rejects Jack Smith’s request for justices to quickly hear Trump immunity dispute [Re: Enlil]
    #28596580 - 12/24/23 01:03 PM (1 month, 3 days ago)

Yea, for a president who incited an insurrection and is trying to run again and is openly saying he wants to be a dictator.


--------------------
:rave::rave::rave: I dropped a trance track "Peace Love & Trance": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4uQBM-mRYU ; :raver2::raver2::raver2::raveface:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEnlilMDiscord
OTD God-King
 User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,470
Loc: Uncanny Valley
Re: US Supreme Court rejects Jack Smith’s request for justices to quickly hear Trump immunity dispute [Re: Enlil]
    #28596584 - 12/24/23 01:06 PM (1 month, 3 days ago)

So... you agree that it's not really relevant to whether or not the government can govern?


--------------------
Censoring opposing views since 2014.

Ask an Attorney

Fuck the Amish


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Onlinelifeiswhatyoumake
Trance in my sig n blood
Male User Gallery


Registered: 09/30/11
Posts: 16,709
Last seen: 3 minutes, 18 seconds
Re: US Supreme Court rejects Jack Smith’s request for justices to quickly hear Trump immunity dispute [Re: Enlil]
    #28596591 - 12/24/23 01:15 PM (1 month, 3 days ago)

Well, Congress just passed a law that doesn't let a President alone pull the USA out of NATO.  I reckon this is in preparation for if Trump wins president.  So, our government does seem a bit pre-occupied with a situation in which the president might be given immunity for inciting an insurrection during their presidency.  If a definitive answer by the highest court is given (and they reject Trump's claim of immunity) then Congress can move on to not worrying about that and govern as normal for the people and not for a possible dictator.

So I do disagree a little, at least.


--------------------
:rave::rave::rave: I dropped a trance track "Peace Love & Trance": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4uQBM-mRYU ; :raver2::raver2::raver2::raveface:


Edited by lifeiswhatyoumake (12/24/23 01:17 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEnlilMDiscord
OTD God-King
 User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,470
Loc: Uncanny Valley
Re: US Supreme Court rejects Jack Smith’s request for justices to quickly hear Trump immunity dispute [Re: Enlil]
    #28596606 - 12/24/23 01:26 PM (1 month, 3 days ago)

You think that law is in response to the criminal case? I think it's clear that the law is in response to trump running for president.


--------------------
Censoring opposing views since 2014.

Ask an Attorney

Fuck the Amish


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Onlinelifeiswhatyoumake
Trance in my sig n blood
Male User Gallery


Registered: 09/30/11
Posts: 16,709
Last seen: 3 minutes, 18 seconds
Re: US Supreme Court rejects Jack Smith’s request for justices to quickly hear Trump immunity dispute [Re: Enlil]
    #28596624 - 12/24/23 01:37 PM (1 month, 3 days ago)

Quote:

Enlil said: I think it's clear that the law is in response to trump running for president.




I agree.
His running for presidency is directly tied to the criminal case, though, right?


--------------------
:rave::rave::rave: I dropped a trance track "Peace Love & Trance": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4uQBM-mRYU ; :raver2::raver2::raver2::raveface:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEnlilMDiscord
OTD God-King
 User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,470
Loc: Uncanny Valley
Re: US Supreme Court rejects Jack Smith’s request for justices to quickly hear Trump immunity dispute [Re: lifeiswhatyoumake]
    #28596632 - 12/24/23 01:40 PM (1 month, 3 days ago)

No. I don't see any nexus. His criminal case is about conduct from 3 years ago.


--------------------
Censoring opposing views since 2014.

Ask an Attorney

Fuck the Amish


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Onlinelifeiswhatyoumake
Trance in my sig n blood
Male User Gallery


Registered: 09/30/11
Posts: 16,709
Last seen: 3 minutes, 18 seconds
Re: US Supreme Court rejects Jack Smith’s request for justices to quickly hear Trump immunity dispute [Re: Enlil]
    #28596636 - 12/24/23 01:46 PM (1 month, 3 days ago)

Quote:

Enlil said:
His criminal case is about conduct from 3 years ago.





Yes.
But the 14th amendment says if you previously took an oath to the Constitution and then engaged in insurrection then you aren't eligible to run for public office, right?
So I'm confused as to why you don't think that makes this criminal case directly related to him running for public office again.


--------------------
:rave::rave::rave: I dropped a trance track "Peace Love & Trance": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4uQBM-mRYU ; :raver2::raver2::raver2::raveface:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEnlilMDiscord
OTD God-King
 User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,470
Loc: Uncanny Valley
Re: US Supreme Court rejects Jack Smith’s request for justices to quickly hear Trump immunity dispute [Re: lifeiswhatyoumake]
    #28596644 - 12/24/23 01:57 PM (1 month, 3 days ago)

Because the criminal case isn't to determine whether he engaged in insurrection under the 14th amendment.  If he's found to be immune to prosecution, it wont have any bearing on his 14th amendment qualification. Similarly, a criminal conviction or acquittal won't necessarily have any bearing either. If people want to challenge his qualification, they should avail themselves of the civil process.


--------------------
Censoring opposing views since 2014.

Ask an Attorney

Fuck the Amish


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineCHeifM4sterDiezL
Chief Globerts

Registered: 07/28/10
Posts: 22,529
Loc: United States
Last seen: 1 hour, 4 minutes
Re: US Supreme Court rejects Jack Smith’s request for justices to quickly hear Trump immunity dispute [Re: Enlil] * 1
    #28597177 - 12/24/23 10:28 PM (1 month, 2 days ago)

Quote:

Enlil said:
How does this issue relate to that? It appears to me that this is about a criminal prosecution.



Any child that knows right from wrong knows what to do. We just have to pray to God that this time for once out of whatever that these scumbags and america realize all u have to do is actually just be true to what you said on paper it's really simple. If I lived in China or Russia or some these other totalitarian nations maybe I could understand. But I doubt it. This is America your trumptard mother fuckers.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2  [ show all ]

Kraken Kratom Shop: Red Vein Kratom


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* The Supreme Court likes treats! afoaf 1,007 4 03/03/04 04:42 PM
by mabus
* Court rejects Seattle schools' racial tiebreaker luvdemshrooms 718 3 07/29/04 08:17 AM
by Seuss
* Supreme Court Rules Cities May Sieze Homes
( 1 2 3 all )
Pirate_Patrick 3,214 40 06/29/05 10:34 AM
by automan
* Tradesport.com Favors Clement for Supreme Court lonestar2004 656 2 07/19/05 04:01 PM
by lonestar2004
* supreme court strikes down anti-sodomy laws Anonymous 943 11 06/27/03 04:12 PM
by Anonymous
* Supreme Court term packed with meaty cases lonestar2004 934 4 10/03/05 02:18 PM
by lonestar2004
* new supreme court nominee has never been a judge afoaf 1,092 13 10/03/05 08:55 PM
by afoaf
* Supreme Court ruling: police may now use drug sniffing dogs during routine traffic stops SWEDEN 2,428 15 01/29/05 05:00 PM
by Swami

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
419 topic views. 2 members, 5 guests and 3 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.033 seconds spending 0.005 seconds on 12 queries.