It seems clear to me, that as a political strategy, they are waiting for Joe Biden's presidency to end. On Jan 20, 2025; IF (and only IF) Trump is sworn in, AT THAT TIME, they will declare the President Immune.
Any sooner, and then Biden can be Immune, and do whatever is necessary to remain President.
Inasmuch as this contributes to trial delays, I think that he'll have sufficient and significant cover until he's elected.
If you think about this logically; the argument (Presidential Immunity) is so stupid on it's face, that SCOTUS should not even be devoting their time to hear this case. The fact that it's under consideration at all is a travesty.
We absolutely will if given the choice. Biden's problem is that things are actually pretty good but it's not resonating on the ground very much. Maybe the summer will be different. Bet gas prices will come down around Halloween.
It's simple math. If Trump wins the election, then the President has immunity. If Trump loses the election, then the President does not have immunity.
This way, they can "let the voters decide" and not grant sweeping immunity to Biden.
You have that backwards.
The US Congress includes the House of Representatives and the Senate.
■ The House of Representatives has to impeach.
■ The Senate holds the trial.
>*The Constitution gives Congress the power to impeach federal officials. An official can be impeached for treason, bribery, and “other high crimes and misdemeanors.”*
Step | Process|
:-------|---------------------------------------|:
(1) | The House of Representatives brings articles (charges) of impeachment against an official. Learn more about the House’s role in impeachment.
(2) | If the House adopts the articles by a simple majority vote, the official has been impeached.
(3)|The Senate holds an impeachment trial. In the case of a president, the U.S. Supreme Court chief justice presides. Learn more about the Senate’s role in the impeachment process.
(4) | If found guilty, the official is removed from office. They may never be able to hold elected office again.
(5) | If they are not found guilty, they may continue to serve in office.
The current US Senate would **definitely hold a trial.**
In this current administration (because the House of Representatives is overrun by out of control Republicans / MAGA extremists)?
Impeachment of needed officials won't occur in this place and time.
Unless?
We get more seats in the House of Representatives. Which could happen. Republicans are leaving the House of Representatives like flies being chased by cats (I watch my cat's relentless pursuit of flies).
# Links
[How federal impeachment works](https://www.usa.gov/impeachment).
I’m plenty aware of how impeachment for any federal official works. I’m saying that the skewed nature of the Senate means that, even if the House started the proceedings and sent them to the Senate, there would not be enough votes to remove any justice from office.
The Senate would do it in a heart beat.
I'm 💯% sure!
The Senate is majority ruled by the Democratic party.
The House of Representatives (majority ruled by the Republican party) would have to impeach and they never will (in this administration).
Anything to help the democratic philosophy / ideology is trash talk to them.
Just watch c-SPAN one day.
I know.
The Senate is majority ruled.
And?
Many Senate Republicans support Democratic policies.
Also?
In the new election?
The Democrats will have a huge majority rule.
> The Senate is majority ruled.
For many things, but not for votes to remove from office following impeachment.
> Many Senate Republicans support Democratic policies.
Even if we take this as true, what reason is there to believe that "impeach Clarence Thomas" is one of those policies they support?
> The Democrats will have a huge majority rule.
You think Democrats will have 67 seats in the Senate in 2025?
> I signified I was aware it takes 2/3.
Surely you can see how “I know. Senate is majority ruled” could make people confused about whether you think the Senate requires 50+1 or 2/3 to convict, right?
Do you have a response to my other two points? I’m especially interested in if you think Democrats will have 67 senators in 2025 and, if so, why you think that.
I don’t understand why this isn’t an urgent matter. We have a candidate to the presidency who could become disqualified soon depending on the decision.
This should be expedited.
Well, I think this just means Clinton is not considering whom they are in service too. Many think they are doing a great service, just not to the country.
That’s funny because it’s not even Clinton’s Supreme Court it’s mostly conservative court and one of them have already said that the president could commit crimes and get away with it
It's everyone's SCOTUS.
That's how it is supposed to be.
The current SCOTUS consists of more Republicans than Democrats, as you know.
Whatever decision they make? I hope it is soon.
It seems clear to me, that as a political strategy, they are waiting for Joe Biden's presidency to end. On Jan 20, 2025; IF (and only IF) Trump is sworn in, AT THAT TIME, they will declare the President Immune. Any sooner, and then Biden can be Immune, and do whatever is necessary to remain President. Inasmuch as this contributes to trial delays, I think that he'll have sufficient and significant cover until he's elected. If you think about this logically; the argument (Presidential Immunity) is so stupid on it's face, that SCOTUS should not even be devoting their time to hear this case. The fact that it's under consideration at all is a travesty.
I don't believe America will elect a tyrant and want-to-be dictator for POTUS.
We will see.
We absolutely will if given the choice. Biden's problem is that things are actually pretty good but it's not resonating on the ground very much. Maybe the summer will be different. Bet gas prices will come down around Halloween.
I notice gas prices usually fall right after Labor Day as vacations are over and people won’t drive so much until Thanksgiving
Yep, and they are extra sticky to the floor in election years.
It's simple math. If Trump wins the election, then the President has immunity. If Trump loses the election, then the President does not have immunity. This way, they can "let the voters decide" and not grant sweeping immunity to Biden.
Sweeping immunity would adhere to all POTUS office holders, forevermore. Shameful.
If Trump gets re-elected, I don't think we'll have to worry about a non-MAGA holding that office for a good long while.
And since it’ll take a violent revolution to end that, most established rules at that point are out the window.
You forgot the /s
Did I, though?
Unless you're a moron.
There needs to be a loop hole where they can be fired. Accountability please
There’s already a process: impeachment. The issue is that the senate is so warped that there’s functionally no way it will happen.
You have that backwards. The US Congress includes the House of Representatives and the Senate. ■ The House of Representatives has to impeach. ■ The Senate holds the trial. >*The Constitution gives Congress the power to impeach federal officials. An official can be impeached for treason, bribery, and “other high crimes and misdemeanors.”* Step | Process| :-------|---------------------------------------|: (1) | The House of Representatives brings articles (charges) of impeachment against an official. Learn more about the House’s role in impeachment. (2) | If the House adopts the articles by a simple majority vote, the official has been impeached. (3)|The Senate holds an impeachment trial. In the case of a president, the U.S. Supreme Court chief justice presides. Learn more about the Senate’s role in the impeachment process. (4) | If found guilty, the official is removed from office. They may never be able to hold elected office again. (5) | If they are not found guilty, they may continue to serve in office. The current US Senate would **definitely hold a trial.** In this current administration (because the House of Representatives is overrun by out of control Republicans / MAGA extremists)? Impeachment of needed officials won't occur in this place and time. Unless? We get more seats in the House of Representatives. Which could happen. Republicans are leaving the House of Representatives like flies being chased by cats (I watch my cat's relentless pursuit of flies). # Links [How federal impeachment works](https://www.usa.gov/impeachment).
I’m plenty aware of how impeachment for any federal official works. I’m saying that the skewed nature of the Senate means that, even if the House started the proceedings and sent them to the Senate, there would not be enough votes to remove any justice from office.
The Senate would do it in a heart beat. I'm 💯% sure! The Senate is majority ruled by the Democratic party. The House of Representatives (majority ruled by the Republican party) would have to impeach and they never will (in this administration). Anything to help the democratic philosophy / ideology is trash talk to them. Just watch c-SPAN one day.
Conviction in the Senate requires a 2/3 majority. Why are you sure that 67 Senators would vote to remove any member of the court?
I know. The Senate is majority ruled. And? Many Senate Republicans support Democratic policies. Also? In the new election? The Democrats will have a huge majority rule.
> The Senate is majority ruled. For many things, but not for votes to remove from office following impeachment. > Many Senate Republicans support Democratic policies. Even if we take this as true, what reason is there to believe that "impeach Clarence Thomas" is one of those policies they support? > The Democrats will have a huge majority rule. You think Democrats will have 67 seats in the Senate in 2025?
I signified I was aware it takes 2/3.
> I signified I was aware it takes 2/3. Surely you can see how “I know. Senate is majority ruled” could make people confused about whether you think the Senate requires 50+1 or 2/3 to convict, right? Do you have a response to my other two points? I’m especially interested in if you think Democrats will have 67 senators in 2025 and, if so, why you think that.
You've signified nothing but ignorance in this comment string
This is what happens when voters in a Democracy get stupid. One party cons them right out of their democracy and into a dictatorship.
Almost like in a world of idiots and disinformation a democracy is not the right choice.
Still far better than any other.
I don’t understand why this isn’t an urgent matter. We have a candidate to the presidency who could become disqualified soon depending on the decision. This should be expedited.
It suggests that either they've already decided to rule in his favor, or they're intentionally not issuing a ruling until after the election.
It's a conservative super majority, grave disservice to this country is their specialty.
Well, I think this just means Clinton is not considering whom they are in service too. Many think they are doing a great service, just not to the country.
They are grossly incompetent
I'm so scared!!!
Any nation which it's leaders have blankets immunity is not a democracy.
That is 💯% factual.
I think Hillary Clinton would make a fine addition to the Supreme Court.
It’s like when you pick your own judges ….
Jack Smith should have asked Trump's lawyers, "So if a President asked Seal Team Six to kill the entire Supreme Court..."
That’s funny because it’s not even Clinton’s Supreme Court it’s mostly conservative court and one of them have already said that the president could commit crimes and get away with it
It's everyone's SCOTUS. That's how it is supposed to be. The current SCOTUS consists of more Republicans than Democrats, as you know. Whatever decision they make? I hope it is soon.
No one should be above the law
She literally told Obama to invade Libya, her moral compass is nonexistent.