Memes

45660 readers

1525 users here now

Rules:

Be civil and nice.
Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

166

Judge Tanya Chutkan be like: (lemmy.ml)

submitted 9 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

6 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 7 points 9 months ago (5 children)

It's an interlocutory appeal. It's not like she has a choice in the matter.

[–] [email protected] 49 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (4 children)

The number of appeals we hand out to rich people for stuff that is clearly made up bullshit that has to be "judged by a court of law" is the issue here.

The entire point of this fucking country existing is so that there is no supreme leader with ultimate immunity.

On top of the evidence that Trump is willing and ready to call for any other President to be jailed, if he doesn't like what they are doing.

Like, this whole "Presidential Immunity" argument is literally fucking bunkum but we're about to have the Supreme Fucking Court rule on BUNKUM. (Not the first time they ruled on absolute bunkum, happened a couple times recently...)

The issue is rather we're allowing these appeals to fucking begin with instead of slapping Trump's mushroom dick out of their mouths and saying "NO YOU DON'T JUST GET TO MAKE SHIT UP AND THEN ARGUE IT ENDLESSLY."

This just in: Trump's Presidential Immunity argument is literally made up bullshit intended to protect him and the party and nothing else. There is zero real-world justification for "total Presidential immunity."

"iTs aN iNtErLoCuToRy aPp---" just fucking stop justifying this horseshit by referencing our fascist legal system.

When someone like me or you tries to make these kind of fucking unhinged arguments in court we're rightly laughed out of the fucking room and our arguments are not taken seriously at all. But someone like Trump makes clearly unhinged and legally dubious arguments, and it's fucking open season, we gotta hear what they have to say because they're rich and connected! When we start treating random poverty-stricken criminals who say unhinged shit with the same kid gloves we treat Trump with, maybe I'll give a shit about these appeals. Trump's unhinged bullshit keeps making it all the way to the Supreme Court somehow, yet most people won't even get a single appeal.

Law and legality does not equal morality or ethics. Our legal system is literally in the early Legalism stage of fascism.

We wouldn't put War Criminals Bush and Cheney behind bars, and our reluctance to actually apply laws to the elite of this country is 100% a direct path to why we refuse to do anything about Trump's clearly unhinged legal arguments, instead taking them at face value every time.

The fact that this even needs to be "ruled on" shows how completely fucking broken our system of government is.

EDIT: Will Ferrell gives you a TL;DR.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

William Roper: “So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!”

Sir Thomas More: “Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?”

William Roper: “Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that!”

Sir Thomas More: “Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!

Robert Bolt, A Man for All Seasons: A Play in Two Acts

load more comments (3 replies)