Did anybody point out that if he could order Seal Team Six to murder someone, he wouldn’t be immune from state prosecution, as murder is not usually a Federal offense?
You keep thinking like our ordinary laws would apply after the takeover. They won’t.
If he did order ST6 to do that, and they did it, that would be after the decree that he was god emperor for life and anyone disagreeing will need to deal with ST6 and their pals face to face. If he wins, there are literally no laws, procedures, or regulations that will be the same. Especially not as to him.
You may as well expect a charging herd of buffalo to obey traffic lights. Every obstacle you can name is based on cooperation with the existing system, not with the tear-down of the existing system.
If he’s inaugurated the disaster will stop if/when the DoD and the federal law enforcement agencies mutiny and take him out by force. If instead they go along, it’s game over.
Plus, if he needed a legal fig-leaf, he would argue federal supremacy: he couldn’t be prosecuted by a state for carrying out his duties as president.
“Don’t quote laws to men with swords!”
If you get to the point where Seal Team 6 starts carrying out such orders without complaint, all bets are off.
It will then be called Seal Team 666.
The state would wait until his term ran out and then…oh, right.
Seal Team Order 66.
Based on Trump’s logic Biden can order Seal Team 6 to assassinate Trump. Sauce for the goose…
I don’t wish death on anyone. Ever. But there will be a time when this clown is gone. I don’t say this because I gleefully await it, I say it because our collective mental health (and physical health to some degree) is effected by this guy refusing to learn or care about anything. I feel he’s bruised this nation and the world so bad, but not after one day in the future, where he can’t hurt anyone (directly) anymore. One day…
I don’t think that the absolute immunity that Trump (or rather his lawyers) are arguing for differentiates between state and federal law. It isn’t like his pardon which only applies to federal charges.
In fact I would be worried if a sitting president was subject to prosecution and incarceration by state courts for their official actions. Texas could easily pass a law that says that providing aid to asylum seekers is illegal and requires a 8 year prison sentence.
Do you really want them legally able to arrest and incarcerate Biden unilaterally?
The problem is that he has whetted the appetite for people who have longed for an authoritarian regime but were not self-assured enough to say it outright (or were too marginalized to inspire broad social movement), and just because he will someday shuffle off this mortal coil doesn’t mean that hunger will go away. The Republican Party has adopted classic fascistic methods including actively purging from their ranks anyone who does not unquestionable adhere to their increasingly radicalized positions, gaslighting the public about basic historical facts, and even vilifying public figues such as Cindy McCain who don’t actually have any political ambitions but are associated with ‘moderate’ Republican icons pour encourager les autres. Until the GOP goes through a complete meltdown, they’re going to continue down this path as evidenced by their parade of candidates trying to one up each other in being more absurdly tyrannical, promoting censorship and restriction of civil rights, and often openly advocating political violence. The problem is not Donald Trump; he’s just the apotheosis of this undercurrent of resentment driving the ‘MAGA’ movement.
Stranger
Three things:
-
A state AG or DA can’t incarcerate anyone unilaterally. They have to go to court, and the state courts are subject to the supervisory jurisdiction of the federal courts.
-
I think that this is exactly what the provision for removal of a state criminal charge to the federal court is designed for: to ensure that the states can’t prosecute a federal official who is carrying out their lawful duties.
-
the immunity issue is a nuanced one, not yes/no. If Biden is carrying out his constitutional duty to see that the federal immigration laws are implemented, that sounds like what would properly attract immunity, unlike ruling up a mob to stop the vote count.
This is exactly what is so very damaging about Trump, and to a lesser degree the current GOP. A whole lot of what has restrained presidents and other officials in the past has been things like propriety, the golden rule, tradition, sometimes honor and fair play, and personal relationships.
Obviously, Trump doesn’t have or respect any of those things, and he’s made people cheer the decision to ignore or actively spit on them.
I don’t think the Republic is just bruised. I think it’s on the ropes, and with another Trump term being the haymaker that could knock it down for the count.
All men have an emotion to kill; when they strongly dislike some one they involuntarily wish he was dead. I have never killed any one, but I have read some obituary notices with great satisfaction.
Clarence Darrow
The thing is, when we say, “There is no Presidential immunity”, what we mean is, “The President is subject to the rule of law in the courts”. In your example, I’d be happy to see this case make it to the Supreme Court, as I’m reasonably sure they’d slap that down. Seal Team assassinations? Not so much. You shouldn’t fear the law when you’re making honest decisions about the interests of the nation, but you should if you’re just pulling whatever shit you feel like pulling. I’m comfortable with letting the courts sort our which is which, which is exactly what Trump doesn’t want.
He’s a distant relative of mine.
In other words, he’s just the mushroom head sticking out of the giant mat of fungus.
Didn’t Stormy Daniels use a similar metaphor?
Yeah, them operating within the US would be illegal in its own right, never mind extrajudicial assassinations.
I would hope they’d refuse those orders- not following obviously illegal orders is something they drum into military people of all ranks.
Could be where I got the wording… 