All Activity

You're putting it past Trump to do that especially if he doesn't have sane people around him? That's some pretty thin ice for democracy to skate on especially if the court rules in his favor on immunity. He'll be even more emboldened next time without the possibility of any consequences. How about another hypothetical. One which really isn't hypothetical since his minions are tits deeps in it in Arizona. What about a president and his allies putting forth a slate of false electors?

What do you know…….

He did but that didn't work out so well. In fact this court is going to have to once again ignore precedent if it decides to grant wide ranging immunity. Precedent set from the Nixon example. https://www.justsecurity.org/44264/supreme-court-justices-president-indicted/ “The dissents are wide of the mark to the extent that they imply that the Court today recognizes sweeping immunity for a President for all acts. The Court does no such thing. The immunity is limited to civil damages claims. Moreover, a President, like Members of Congress, judges, prosecutors, or congressional aides — all having absolute immunity — are not immune for acts outside official duties. Ante at 457 U. S. 753-755. Even the broad immunity of the Speech and Debate Clause has its limits.[fn3]” [fn3] “In United States v. Brewster, 408 U. S. 501 (1972), we held that the Speech and Debate Clause does not prohibit prosecution of a Senator for accepting a bribe designed to influence his legislative acts.”. - Justice Burger “But there is no contention that the President is immune from criminal prosecution in the courts under the criminal laws enacted by Congress, or by the States, for that matter. Nor would such a claim be credible. " - Justice White

well.....Nixon tried to say that.

No president has ever called the military to back his coup, but you're talking hypotheticals too...

That gets sticky in a situation such as the one we went through only three years ago. Trump could have called out the military to back his coup attempt and as we've seen, his sycophants in Congress would never impeach him. Next time, if he's elected and his Project 2025 comes to fruition he'll have vetted loyalists to do his bidding. If an authoritarian we're to pull it off he'd never become a normal citizen. In our history we've never had a president need immunity from breaking the law while in office. There wouldn't be a never ending load of cases. That hasn't happened before. Frivolous cases would be bounced immediately.

Now I know he's only a 3 star (little poke @Dr. Strangelove cause he hates 3* recruiting) but 40 D1 offers.. Is there an expectation of a earning 4th star? Seems there was some hype around this kid both locally and nationally. Someone above (or maybe some journalist) stated he's body ready more than most freshmen TE prospects which kind of shocked me as I've always thought soft hands and quick feet were essential TE attributes more so than height/weight ratio. How wrong am I?

3 star galore. They’ve had some limited traction with the higher rated fellas. They need to win this year. Bowl game.

I think the frame work that a sitting president can't be tried until impeached is sound. If not you would have a never ending load of cases against every president for any conceivable slight. That said once they become a normal citizen again impeachment would no longer be necessary, and cases should go straight to court.

65K a year a year and they don't even get the choice to walk. That sucks, maybe not even so much for the student but more for their family.

Sucks for those kids that the school has a spineless administration.

The circular logic to authoritarianism Impeachment is not the vehicle to deal with, for example an insurrectionist, the judicial system is. But the judicial system is not that vehicle because the president has broad immunity and the president must first be impeached and convicted.

It says they were thorwing bottles and things at the cops.

The primary difference being that, in this instance, it sets a precedent for authoritarianism. See above. Congrats on creating this. Wish I could say that it was difficult to see coming and that Trump really veered off course, but you know, decades of being a piece of s#!t kind of eliminates that excuse.

Hmmmm…..my son in law just graduated from there.

Hopefully they land some talent. This recruiting class is lacking blue chip talent.

I have a fan or two, he/she/it (most likely and "it") loves to leave emoji's in every post. Awesome to know I'm liked. Thank You anonymous one!!!

mafia attorneys defend their bosses

Correct. This attorney did not turn down the case it seems since he/she is arguing the case.

thread

There are examples all the time where defense attorneys either turn down cases or refuse to make a certain argument that the client wants because it's just wrong.

I remember one poster saying that many of the protesters were in fact supporting a terrorist group and being anti-jew. That poster was chastised and told that he/she was incorrect. I remember one poster saying that for many of the protesters it was in fact just a social gathering, a party, if you will. Now we see pictures and videos of them dancing, eating Dunkin Donuts, drinking lattes and listening to music. Again, he/she was told they were wrong. Now we have the second largest hammy supporting population in the world...on college campuses here in America. And apparently they love sushi and salsa dancing. That, the poster did not predict. The same poster also said that cell phones and the internet would not "catch on" and that the Huskers would win at least 9 games last year...soooooo there is that.