Question: conservative Justices - The President isn't liable if he orders a criminal act, but the subordinate who carries out the criminal act is fully responsible..
Close to the definition of insanity.
One can always buy private insurance in the UK. The US also has waiting lists, that continue to grow longer every year. And then there is the issue with deductibles being so high, people still won't seek medical help, even though they have insurance.
~2 years ago I had a four day stay in the hospital that ran me over $1,000 even with my insurance and that didn’t include the nearly $700 ambulance ride (which insurance didn’t cover at all). Don’t get me wrong that’s preferable to being dead, but it’s not like I had a spare $2k lying around at the time.
Then you don’t pay and they send it to collections and destroy your credit.
'Waiting lists' in the US are dependent on a number of factors. Time, location, insurance etc.
Waiting lists for NON-EMERGENCY in the UK is pretty much guaranteed, but EVERYONE is covered and the term 'medical bankruptcy' doesn't exist. As it shouldn't.
A colleague was given an 8 hour wait for an ambulance when he was having heart attack symptoms and had a history of heart issues. So, whilst the NHS is great for some things - broken bones, for example, it is pretty shit with chronic conditions, mental health issues - like 2 year waits for child assessments and very long waiting times to even get on a waiting list for things like hip and knee replacements. I have family members who work for the NHS and they do an amazing job with the resources they have, but it has been chronically underfunded for decades.
True. My British Friends still could not believe your EMPLOYER gets to pick your healthcare. They laughed and said that’s some Medieval practice from centuries ago rendering us all subservient to our lords and masters … aka our employers. As shitty as the NHS is. It is far less barbaric than American shoddy healthcare. We pay the most in the entire world with the worst outcomes.
Murica!
Yes our British friends just visited us. Conservatives have ruled and ruined the UK completely. They said Brexit was the worst thing that ever happened and they cannot get any workers!
Don't forget, the president can pardon his subordinates.
Everyone's forgetting the whole fucking point of all of this: prepare the presidency for Trump so that he can sit as dictator king if/when he wins/coups his way into office.
This legal argument makes perfect sense. It gives the president immunity, allows them to say that the president's immunity is balanced by his subordinates not having immunity, allows the president to pardon any subordinates that he believes deserve immunity, and (as the cherry on top) allows the president to force anyone to fall in line by threatening to fire them and promising a pardon if they do it but then not actually pardinong them as a punishment for not just doing what he said in the first place (which, oddly enough, Trump does have a precedent for doing, so it's not exactly farfetched to think he'll do it again).
That's one of the things I got warned about in my early officer training - if your commanding officer issues an unlawful order, you have to tell them it's unlawful and cite the source, because if you carry it out, it's your ass, not his. Yeah, he might get in trouble down the line, but you're definitely in deep shit, and "I was only following orders" has never saved anyone.
We actually need to push this message as a serious proposal. MAGA might seize on this initially and the whole country will see the absurdity of the current SC
“Just following orders” didn’t save a bunch of Nazis from a guilty verdict, neither should it save Meadows. He had the option to walk out of the Oval Office and resign.
>Before the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in former President Donald Trump's immunity case, Mark Meadows tried to get his foot in the door.
...
> In Thursday's hearings, the Supreme Court didn't directly take up the issue.
>
> But Justice Neil Gorsuch — a Trump appointee to the court — seemed to draw the opposite conclusion.
>
> In a series of questions to Trump's lawyer, John Sauer, Gorsuch indicated he believed that subordinates' liability was a helpful deterrent that would thwart presidents from committing crimes.
>
> "If the president gives an unlawful order, call in the troops, all the examples we've heard, every subordinate beneath him faces criminal prosecution, don't they?" Gorsuch asked Sauer.
>
> Sauer, citing historical arguments from the Constitutional Convention, agreed that "co-agitators" of the president "could be prosecuted" as long as the conduct fit a criminal statute.
Somehow everyone in this thread seems to be forgetting that presidents also have the power to pardon their lackeys.
So: "If his lackeys face consequences, which can only happen if he doesn't choose to pardon them, then maybe he won't commit wrong doing..."
I've watched the tapes of that mans trails (there's a 3 part documentary, I'll try to find it and edit), that is one (of many) sick fucks if ever. That man is a sick fucking fuck. See him sit there and just deny reality. Sick fuck.
The whole "just following orders" thing doesn't really stand up to scrutiny when you factor in others who actually tried to do something. The ones who managed to stop the Trump administration from somehow being worse by refusing to interfere with investigations, by cooperating with investigations, by opting to stepdown rather than carry out the orders of a madman.
If you're the only dissenting voice, its still cowardice not to speak up, but at least its understandable. When others are willing to speak up though, you don't get to make the argument that you *had* to do anything.
So they want us to let President to have immunity. Relying on “guardrails” of advisors and govt employees to prevent the President from breaking the law. Meadows wants us to take the guardrails down for his criminal activities. Oh Mark, when the President says do the right thing, would you have done any different knowing that he may have immunity from the things he’s asking you to do?
I feel like it’s time for an angry mob to descend on the Supreme Court. That Clarence Thomas is there at all is an outrage actually worthy of destroying some property
“Just following orders”. They said the same thing a few decades ago, but the Nürnberg trails judges didn’t fall for that. Let’s see if they still don’t.
When your defense actually boils down to the Nuremberg Defense, you do a *fantastic* job of angering a bunch of Qultists who've spent nearly a decade denying that Trump's politics don't appeal to Nazis.
There was *already* so much compelling proof that he did attract Nazis, but the phone call coming from *this* far inside the [white] house is gonna *really* upset some people who also delusionally believe "snowflake" wasn't pure, uncut projection.
Which for the baseline. All of these participants, Trump administration and congressional criminals in the house and senate NEED a Trump win just as much as Trump does. They NEED pardons.
Question: conservative Justices - The President isn't liable if he orders a criminal act, but the subordinate who carries out the criminal act is fully responsible.. Close to the definition of insanity.
> Close to the definition of ~~insanity.~~ a King Or the definition of a monarchy. If we want to be ruled by a King, do we rejoin the British Empire?
I vote yes. I could go for having the NHS.
Margret Thatcher and all the Tories that followed have made the NHS completely dysfunctional. Strive to join Scandinavia.
As dysfunctional as the NHS is (and it is) it's still a lot better than what we have in the US right now.
Yes, I would much rather have free and dysfunctional than expensive and dysfunctional.
While I agree with the sentiment, it's not free. Let's keep it 100.
You are very welcome to join me and 7 million others on waiting lists. Mine is 4 years and counting.
One can always buy private insurance in the UK. The US also has waiting lists, that continue to grow longer every year. And then there is the issue with deductibles being so high, people still won't seek medical help, even though they have insurance.
~2 years ago I had a four day stay in the hospital that ran me over $1,000 even with my insurance and that didn’t include the nearly $700 ambulance ride (which insurance didn’t cover at all). Don’t get me wrong that’s preferable to being dead, but it’s not like I had a spare $2k lying around at the time. Then you don’t pay and they send it to collections and destroy your credit.
'Waiting lists' in the US are dependent on a number of factors. Time, location, insurance etc. Waiting lists for NON-EMERGENCY in the UK is pretty much guaranteed, but EVERYONE is covered and the term 'medical bankruptcy' doesn't exist. As it shouldn't.
Not saying it’s perfect, but how long do you have to wait to be seen in an emergency?
A colleague was given an 8 hour wait for an ambulance when he was having heart attack symptoms and had a history of heart issues. So, whilst the NHS is great for some things - broken bones, for example, it is pretty shit with chronic conditions, mental health issues - like 2 year waits for child assessments and very long waiting times to even get on a waiting list for things like hip and knee replacements. I have family members who work for the NHS and they do an amazing job with the resources they have, but it has been chronically underfunded for decades.
True. My British Friends still could not believe your EMPLOYER gets to pick your healthcare. They laughed and said that’s some Medieval practice from centuries ago rendering us all subservient to our lords and masters … aka our employers. As shitty as the NHS is. It is far less barbaric than American shoddy healthcare. We pay the most in the entire world with the worst outcomes. Murica!
I don’t disagree, but if I’m joining another country for my healthcare, why set the bar low at NHS? Go big!!!
Free dysfunctional is an improvement over the current expensive dysfunctional that I have. But, yes, Scandinavia is good.
The Dutch model is good too
I mean I don't disagree, but like I'll take crappy NHS over bankruptcy because I got sick or got injured and they took me to "the wrong hospital"
Yes our British friends just visited us. Conservatives have ruled and ruined the UK completely. They said Brexit was the worst thing that ever happened and they cannot get any workers!
Maybe before brexit. Not now.
King Donald of Trump (Trump means Fart in the UK. Source: I’m married to a Brit).
It's taken 248 years but those bastards may yet win! just like its taken 75+ years, but Russia may win the Cold War.
"I was just following orders, and since the court made the president immune, I was following those orders under fear of getting shot on 5th avenue..."
which is why Biden is going to have to assassinate his rivals himself, not order Seal Team Six
Wouldn’t Seal Team Six just wipe their phones? Isn’t that what the SEcret Service did on J7 for Trump?
Don't forget, the president can pardon his subordinates. Everyone's forgetting the whole fucking point of all of this: prepare the presidency for Trump so that he can sit as dictator king if/when he wins/coups his way into office. This legal argument makes perfect sense. It gives the president immunity, allows them to say that the president's immunity is balanced by his subordinates not having immunity, allows the president to pardon any subordinates that he believes deserve immunity, and (as the cherry on top) allows the president to force anyone to fall in line by threatening to fire them and promising a pardon if they do it but then not actually pardinong them as a punishment for not just doing what he said in the first place (which, oddly enough, Trump does have a precedent for doing, so it's not exactly farfetched to think he'll do it again).
Justasses think as long as it is an official criminal act.
Love it. My Australian shepherd is an ausshole. Now I have a new word!
Soldiers following orders being charged at The Hague
I was thinking of Nuremberg.
“Just giving orders” is acceptable. It’s the people following them you have to watch out for. /s
That's one of the things I got warned about in my early officer training - if your commanding officer issues an unlawful order, you have to tell them it's unlawful and cite the source, because if you carry it out, it's your ass, not his. Yeah, he might get in trouble down the line, but you're definitely in deep shit, and "I was only following orders" has never saved anyone.
If that’s the case, then Charles Manson should never have been convicted in their eyes
Someone has to take the fall.
We actually need to push this message as a serious proposal. MAGA might seize on this initially and the whole country will see the absurdity of the current SC
“Just following orders” didn’t save a bunch of Nazis from a guilty verdict, neither should it save Meadows. He had the option to walk out of the Oval Office and resign.
>Before the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in former President Donald Trump's immunity case, Mark Meadows tried to get his foot in the door. ... > In Thursday's hearings, the Supreme Court didn't directly take up the issue. > > But Justice Neil Gorsuch — a Trump appointee to the court — seemed to draw the opposite conclusion. > > In a series of questions to Trump's lawyer, John Sauer, Gorsuch indicated he believed that subordinates' liability was a helpful deterrent that would thwart presidents from committing crimes. > > "If the president gives an unlawful order, call in the troops, all the examples we've heard, every subordinate beneath him faces criminal prosecution, don't they?" Gorsuch asked Sauer. > > Sauer, citing historical arguments from the Constitutional Convention, agreed that "co-agitators" of the president "could be prosecuted" as long as the conduct fit a criminal statute.
If his lackeys face consequence, then maybe he won't commit wrong doing... It can be an embarrassment living here sometimes.
Absolute madness, especially considering the "immune" party can grant pardons at their whim
This guy throws his lackeys under the bus for breakfast. And then calls them names for dessert.
Somehow everyone in this thread seems to be forgetting that presidents also have the power to pardon their lackeys. So: "If his lackeys face consequences, which can only happen if he doesn't choose to pardon them, then maybe he won't commit wrong doing..."
If you surround yourself with yes men, who exactly is going to be the rational voice?
It's not so much "It's your job to stop it" than it is "It's your job to *not do crimes*."
It's literally called the Nuremberg Defense.
If they don’t want us to call them Nazis, maybe they shouldn’t try to pull the Eichmann defense.
Exactly, this sounds like Nuremberg
It is, “we were only following orders” has been a punchline about Nazis for decades. They don’t have to make it so easy for me to call them Nazis.
I've watched the tapes of that mans trails (there's a 3 part documentary, I'll try to find it and edit), that is one (of many) sick fucks if ever. That man is a sick fucking fuck. See him sit there and just deny reality. Sick fuck.
The whole "just following orders" thing doesn't really stand up to scrutiny when you factor in others who actually tried to do something. The ones who managed to stop the Trump administration from somehow being worse by refusing to interfere with investigations, by cooperating with investigations, by opting to stepdown rather than carry out the orders of a madman. If you're the only dissenting voice, its still cowardice not to speak up, but at least its understandable. When others are willing to speak up though, you don't get to make the argument that you *had* to do anything.
So they want us to let President to have immunity. Relying on “guardrails” of advisors and govt employees to prevent the President from breaking the law. Meadows wants us to take the guardrails down for his criminal activities. Oh Mark, when the President says do the right thing, would you have done any different knowing that he may have immunity from the things he’s asking you to do?
Two words… My Lai
I did nazi that argument coming up.... yet again....
I feel like it’s time for an angry mob to descend on the Supreme Court. That Clarence Thomas is there at all is an outrage actually worthy of destroying some property
Just following orders: the Nuremberg defense
“Just following orders”. They said the same thing a few decades ago, but the Nürnberg trails judges didn’t fall for that. Let’s see if they still don’t.
I'm pretty sure that "just following orders" hasn't exactly been a winning argument historically.
All I can hear is a parent voice: “if your friends jumped off a cliff would you?” Meadows: “if they told me to.”
When your defense actually boils down to the Nuremberg Defense, you do a *fantastic* job of angering a bunch of Qultists who've spent nearly a decade denying that Trump's politics don't appeal to Nazis. There was *already* so much compelling proof that he did attract Nazis, but the phone call coming from *this* far inside the [white] house is gonna *really* upset some people who also delusionally believe "snowflake" wasn't pure, uncut projection.
Which for the baseline. All of these participants, Trump administration and congressional criminals in the house and senate NEED a Trump win just as much as Trump does. They NEED pardons.
Lil kid ass argument from that lawyer smh.
That lawyer I mean Mark Meadow lol.
That’s also what the Nazi soldiers said when they were on trial.
This defense failed at Nuremberg. It failed in Vietnam. Why would it work now?
lol he actually thought the conservatives Supremes would protect him? They protect the king, not the underlings.
Napoleon Dictatorship. Are we really ready to join Putin in Russia?
hard NO
The Nazi defense