“(With) today’s Supreme Court decision on presidential immunity, that fundamentally changed. For all practical purposes, there are virtually no limits on what the president can do. It’s a fundamentally new principle and it’s a dangerous precedent because the power of the office will no longer be constrained by the law even including the supreme court of the United States.”

Throughout his address, Biden underscored the gravity of the moment, emphasizing that the only barrier to the president’s authority now lies in the personal restraint of the officeholder. He warned vehemently against the prospect of Trump returning to power, painting a stark picture of the dangers such an outcome could pose.

  • inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Dumbass and spineless Biden and Democrats. The supreme court literally just started that America had a king but this dumbass party would rather take some stupid fucking high road bullshit instead of playing the game to ensure the fascist fuck around and find out.

    They don’t even have to resort to assassinations, they could really tell the IRS to audit 501© and remove their status from the churches and bullshit Republican charities, or tell the justice department to focus on domestic terrorism and corruption to fuck over Republican groups and representatives, or tell the FDA to allow the sale of raw milk.

    Play the god damn game and be the fucking king if these corrupt justice says there’s a king.

    • Kiernian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      they could really tell the IRS to audit 501© and remove their status from the churches and bullshit Republican charities

      That would be juuuuuust about the dumbest thing they could possibly do. It would mobilize gigantic swaths of voters who are heavily invested in rhetoric over fact-checking.

      Doing away with Roe mobilized many of those voters who could be considered to be fence sitters towards the left. Removing church tax exemptions would move them right back and it would do NOTHING to solve the problem, because while the actual big offenders are happily USING the hell out of that tax exemption, they’re rich enough that they’ll get along fine without it.

      It WOULD hurt a whole lot of TINY churches that employ 1-50 people per church and actually do community work, though. All of those would go away. That’s a LOT of rural food shelves.

      I’m largely against the religious tax exemption, but that’s a problem we should worry about AFTER we can replace the nationwide infrastructure we’d be dismantling by doing so with something at least as effective as what’s there now.

      • TheGalacticVoid@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        It also screws over the many churches or other religious organizations that genuinely do good for their communities

    • Excrubulent@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      I honestly don’t know why anyone is strategising as if they’re on the same side as dems or any politician. I’m not even convinced we have a common enemy in Trump, because they don’t seem serious about beating him.

      The question you should ask when voting is “Who is my preferred enemy?” Biden won’t abuse the carte blanche immunity from criminal prosecution? Great, sounds like he’s the weaker enemy, so vote for him. Force him to keep the position he clearly doesn’t want. Force him to disappoint his base for another four years.

      While he’s doing that, get to work building alternatives that meet people’s needs from the bottom up and wean them off of this criminal system, to undermine it and prepare people to thrive as it crumbles.

      The great thing about this political theory of change is that it’s the same regardless of who’s in power. It decouples you from the capricious, disempowering shifts of electoral politics.

        • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          But is he wrong? From Nixon, to Reagan, to Newt GIngrich, to Mitch McConnell to Trump, the Democrats have been feckless and refused to halt this march to fascism. They are complicit by tacit acceptance. This need to adhere to some vague Status Quo (Capitalist Donor Class) is why we are in this situation. It’s time to wake up and realize the Marxists were right all along. You can’t compromise with Capitalism.

          • nova_ad_vitum@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            Yes, he and you are obviously wrong. Even if everything you said was 100 percent true (lol) the people who failed to stop facism are obviously not the same as fascists themselves. Everything thinking person knows this , and Marx would too if he was alive.

            • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              the people who failed to stop facism are obviously not the same as fascists themselves.

              Superior Orders, or ignorance of what is happening, does not absolve one of responsibility.

              Since the 2020 election cycle began, “fascism” took on a plethora of new meanings, none of which actually accessed the ongoing material conditions surrounding the rise of fascism outside of the Republican Party. In fact, one could easily conclude that “fascists” and “republican” were interchangeable words if they paid close enough attention to the elections. But they are not. The confusion around fascism, weaponized by liberals to drive people to the voting polls, has disallowed any inspection of the primary role the Democratic Party (with its neoliberal, populist, and austerity police state policies) has played by sheltering and coddling this current iteration of fascism. source

              • nova_ad_vitum@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                4 months ago

                Again, that is not the claim that was made. You can’t even stay on topic. I bet Marx could stay on topic .

                • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  Marx abused alcohol, so not sure. The Republicans are capitalists. The Democrats are capitalists. To Marxists they are the same. Liberalism fails because it cannot address the contradictions inherent to capitalism, inequality and wealth accumulation. Capitalism requires inequality for wealth accumulation.

                  Social democratic reforms can alleviate the inequality and distribute the wealth more equitably, but, because it does not replace capitalism itself, it always falters.

                  So, although Democrats and Republicans differ on social policy, they both defer to capitalism. Capitalism rules both parties.

                  • nova_ad_vitum@lemmy.ca
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    4 months ago

                    The Republicans are capitalists. The Democrats are capitalists. To Marxists they are the same.

                    Meaningful, important distinctions can exist even when Marxists are unable to recognize them.

                    Social democratic reforms can alleviate the inequality and distribute the wealth more equitably, but, because it does not replace capitalism itself, it always falters.

                    Explain? Because systems ultimately fail , it’s no good? Longevity and risilience are worthwhile considerations when designing and economic system to govern a civilization, but uktimate fallibility does not invalidate them entirely. More to the point, what evidence is there that Marxists societies do/would last longer?