![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/d7332eee-5b30-4363-9345-017638625c6f.jpeg)
![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/44bf11eb-4336-40eb-9778-e96fc5223124.png)
That’s not how immunity works. It’s not a defense at trial. It’s presumptive, and prevents you from even filing charges. If you look at my screenshot above, their stated intent is to protect the president from having to go through trials.
That’s not how immunity works. It’s not a defense at trial. It’s presumptive, and prevents you from even filing charges. If you look at my screenshot above, their stated intent is to protect the president from having to go through trials.
What trial court? He’s immune from prosecution.
Look, I recommend reading the decision, especially the first few pages, instead of basing your opinions on what you think makes sense. I’m done trying to convince you about what’s in the document, it’s there for you to read if you actually care and aren’t just arguing in bad faith.
So how do they prosecute then? If the president commits a crime, let’s say he accepts a bribe for a pardon, you aren’t allowed to bring a prosecution unless a court deems the act unofficial. And the court isn’t permitted to find that the act was unofficial because the bribery is merely an allegation and hasn’t been proved. And you can’t prove the allegation because you can’t prosecute a president for official acts.
It’s all over the Syllabus section, but here’s a specific quote:
Unfortunately I think you’re missing something here. The court ruled that the president has immunity. Like the kind of immunity diplomats get in foreign countries that enables them to run over people in their cars. Immunity as a concept only makes sense if the action performed is actually illegal. Nobody can be prosecuted for legal actions. The president is now unprosecutable for both legal AND illegal actions.
It’s a nonsensical and horrifying ruling. The fact that the president would be violating his oath of office doesn’t cancel out the immunity, it just makes the crime that much more disgusting, and the impossibility of justice that much more galling.
Coinciding (by happenstance no doubt) with the fall of monarchies.
Sic semper tyrranis
Everyone loves a buffet!
Prove it, show us the Rizz!
Rust Cohle sees you and has a vision about the vast emptiness of space, where he realizes that life has no meaning and time just repeats endlessly in an inescapable loop. He numbs himself every night trying to forget you, but he can’t escape the gravity of your memory. He’s pulled under the darkness, like a crashing ocean wave, and he’s drowning, over and over, in the inky blackness. He realizes you’re trans five years later, after everything he loves is dead, because he’s the only one who can.
Would you use the term “bitch” when talking about dogs? Or just say female dog to avoid being misunderstood? It used to be used that way, but now you’re going to sound like an asshole if you use it.
Once people start using a technical term as a slur, it gets tainted by that additional meaning. You can’t forcefully separate the technical term from the slur. If you don’t want people to think you’re throwing around slurs, you need to find a new word to use.
Don’t blame the people hurt by the slurs, blame the assholes who misused the word so often that they fucked up its meaning.
Scientists have not conclusively determined which species of skink is the cutest. But it’s this one.
Where is the line between “on Earth” and not? If you’re orbiting the planet does that still count? Do you have to be below a certain altitude? Certainly flying in an airplane isn’t enough to qualify as having left Earth. Is it leaving the earth’s atmosphere? Is that even something with a precise enough definition?
I guess what I’m saying is we should exile Elon to Mars and then start the timer.