9mo ago

4-star generals side with Smith, tell SCOTUS Trump immunity claim is 'assault' on democracy

lawandcrime.com 4-star generals side with Smith, tell SCOTUS Trump immunity claim is 'assault' on democracy

A group of retired four-star generals have filed a brief with the Supreme Court, urging justices to agree that Donald Trump is not entitled to immunity from criminal prosecution.

A distinguished group of retired four-star generals and admirals from the U.S. military have argued in a brief filed in the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday that Donald Trump’s claims of absolute “presidential immunity” from criminal prosecution tied to Jan. 6 is an “assault” on the “foundational commitments” underpinning democracy and if his argument is allowed to succeed before them later this month, it threatens “to subvert the careful balance between the executive and legislative branches struck in the Constitution.”

The 38-page amicus brief features 19 authors, all of them decorated retired admirals, generals or secretaries from branches of the U.S. Army, Navy and Air Force respectively. On April 25, the high court is poised to hear Trump’s question of immunity against prosecution for his alleged criminal conspiracy to subvert the results of the 2020 election. and according to the brief, these are arguments that should be approached with extreme caution.

113 comments

I mean Trump and his allies goal is literally to dismantle democracy so that shouldn’t come as a surprise.
- Such a patriot. To celebrate the county that gave him a life that most will never even think about. By dismantling it completely.
  
  It doesn't matter if it's a flaming pile of shit, as long as you're at the top.

It was later discovered that Kavanaugh turned the document into a beer bong after claiming to have “totally read that shit” and filling it with 3 Miller Lites, at a local frat party
- Well...It's not like he was going to turn down a dare from Squee.
  
  bro you never turn down a dare from a brother. Bro

A group of retired Generals/Admirals are the ones who convinced Congress to repeal DADT back in 2011 so our LGBTQ+ brethren could openly serve.
I understand that the entire Government has changed since then, and it's an entirely different branch of the Government that they're petitioning, but fuck, this gives me hope.
These people do still have some sort of influence, and they're attempting to use it for good. That makes me happy.
- Most notable, though, is that they face no jeopardy for speaking out. None of them could do this while serving.
  
  This is true, to an extent. They can be much more vocal (publicly) than anyone currently serving, without fear of reprisal/loss of benefits.
  However, these retired O's definitely have enough money that should they want to abandon ship and move their family elsewhere, they absolutely could. They don't have to get involved anymore, so I like that they're taking the time to do so. It shows that they still gaf.

How the fuck is this even before the Supreme Court? It shouldn't have even been a question and it should've just been laughed out of Court when it was proposed. I can see SCOTUS ruling to give it to him, under the idea that Biden would be too principled to actually make use of that new power (instead of say ordering the assassination of Russian agents from a certain political party, like he should).
- The second they rule in Trump's favor I'm all for forcefully removing the SC and implementing massive ethics reform and judicial review. And no law shall stop it, because the President is above all reproach, including, apparently, a literal insurrection.
  
  Biden should just announce that he will have Trump and the entire SC executed if they decide the president has absolute immunity.
- The Supreme Court chose to rule on this after the courts in Colorado already ruled that the president was not an exception to the insurrection clause. They didn't have to, they wanted to.

I really can't fucking believe he's going to get away with everything. Their plan of running the clock is working and I have absolutely no doubt Trump will win the election allowing his AG dog to dutifully wipe everything away. Hell, seeing how this timeline is going I could even imagine his new AG opening an investigation into Biden that gets fast tracked somehow.... We've all collectively somehow become even fucking dumber over the last 4 years that I could even be so sure Trump will win...
It just blows my mind how someone so unbelievably stupid, someone so obviously corrupt in his personality, someone so abhorrent, could skate his way through the justice system. "Teflon Don" suits him. The only "positive" here are the civil suits that hit him where he cares most, his bank account.
- I get what you are saying but keep in mind that he has been losing his ability to stay composed for awhile now and it seems to be gaining speed. He is sundowning as we watch. I doubt he will be mentally capable of campaigning in a few months. He literally just told the world that Biden took a shit in the oval office, just when you think he can't get more unhinged, he proves you wrong.
  I'm not sure where to find it now but some clinical psychologists or psychiatrists (iirc) gave a pretty decent breakdown of how trump is breaking down mentally.
  
  He told people Biden soiled itz and they laughed and clapped.
  I see no evidence this is a problem for him. His lack of cognition, morals, etc has never really been a problem before.
  
  Biden took a shit on the oval office
  Sounds like one of those projection accusation confessions.
  
  All he needs to do is be able to stand up come election day, then they can just weekend at Bernies for the next 4 years.
  
  This is 100% copium. The only thing that matters is actually convicting him and carrying out the criminal sentence. Until then, all this speculative BS is nothing but a distraction to provide cover for how badly all the leaders who aren't already outright traitors are fucking this up.
  
  some clinical psychologists or psychiatrists (iirc) gave a pretty decent breakdown of how trump is breaking down mentally.
  this one here?
  
  When did he say Biden took a shit in the Oval Office? Lol
  
  It's the cult plus some normies voting against Biden. Don't underestimate how little they give a shit. We thought it ended with grab em by the sexual assault parts.
- On the other hand, let this be motivation to make him lose in November. All his legal maneuvers will be moot at that point, and he'll have some very angry judges to answer to.
  If Trump loses, the delays mean nothing. He will never enjoy a free day of peace ever again.

It's quite ominous that retired senior military officers need to say this. It suggests that if Trump is reelected, we could see widespread mutiny, because officers would refuse to accept orders for which they might be criminally liable. Even if SCOTUS makes Trump immune, it does not necessarily make anyone following his orders immune. Choosing between a committing a crime like murder, and another like insubordination, an officer might well choose insubordination.
- They already did that last time. Trump tried to deploy the military to stop the BLM protests. The Joint Chiefs said no and sent out a memo reminding the entire force they swear oaths to the Constitution, not to Trump.
- I think that for once, this is about ethics more than law.
  
  So...we're doomed?
  If there's one thing this court cares less about than law...it's ethics.

So military people are telling conservatives the right thing to do?
Absolutely gonna be ignored.
- Reagan must be doing cartwheels in his coffin just about now.

the problem with telling scotus that this is an assault on democracy is that scotus is openly complicit in the assault on democracy. you can't shame the shameless.

Next up on Fox News: "How the U.S. Military is an Assault on Freedom!"
- The military industrial complex will now proceed to go broke, presumably. Checkmate fascists.
  
  Think we can trick conservatives into defunding the "woke" military?
- Probably, they've been running stories about how the military is too soft to fight a war because women and trans stuff. Which is just hilarious.

If some of those generals gift an RV or fishing trip their words might have an influence on SCOTUS.

If Trump is such a danger then why aren't you talking about oswalding him
- Unfortunately doing so would make the magats go nuclear

The claim is only a threat because the courts are so comically stacked towards his position.
Americans don't want to read the writing on the wall. Democracy already failed. We've simply refused to acknowledge we're living in the rubble.
- Americans don’t want to read the writing on the wall. Democracy already failed. We’ve simply refused to acknowledge we’re living in the rubble.
  We're not there yet, calm yourself. Your rhetoric doesn't help.
  Having said that, wake the fuck up people, participate.
  
  We’re not there yet
  Go check out states like Ohio and Wisconsin, where 40% of the voting base selects a supermajority of the legislature.
  My own Texas Senate has been similarly packed and stacked. And that's before you get into the openly adversarial practices of state voting offices.
  We are not a democracy in any real sense. We are, at best, a Republic of regional demagogues and despots.
  Having said that, wake the fuck up people, participate.
  Lining up for another game of 3-card-monte because this time I can beat the dealer.

Seems unnecessary. There's no way that SCOTUS would equate the Constitution's description of Presidential immunity with the Sovereign immunity found in other countries.
- There's no way scotus would repeal Roe.
  
  Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg even said that Roe was a faulty decision that was too far-reaching and too sweeping. It was a decision that was physician-centered rather than women-centered. Roe was always bound to be overturned.

Do you guys remember when a huge group of retired intelligence people told us the Hunter laptop had "all the hallmarks or russian disinformation"? Yeah, I dont care or trust what politically motivated people have to say about issues and neither should you.
- The word "disinfornation" came from the press. The authors stated it "has all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation", adding:
  We want to emphasize that we do not know if the emails, provided to the New York Post by President Trump's personal attorney Rudy Giuliani, are genuine or not and that we do not have evidence of Russian involvement—just that our experience makes us deeply suspicious that the Russian government played a significant role in this case.
  Politico (owned btw. by german far right Axel Springer LLC, Germanys Fox News) distorted the meaning of the letter:
  There was message distortion. All we were doing was raising a yellow flag that this could be Russian disinformation. Politico deliberately distorted what we said. It was clear in paragraph five
  
  Sure, but to anyone that was looking at it knew from the first week it was real, and so they needed to try to pretend it was not.
- Yeah, I dont care or trust what politically motivated people have to say about issues and neither should you.
  So we should ignore what you have to say? You should have lead with that.
- You probably should stop ignoring the doctors and start taking your medications

113 comments