I will say based comments posted after a recent NonZero podcast, it got me rethinking the presidential immunity decision. One doesn’t need to go to extremes to see the implications. There was a short discussion posted after about it which to me was interesting. The civilized and thoughtful comments after were nice. I’m paraphrasing the comments and changing the gifts:
#1 comments that the Supreme Court ruling is a major shift, because of some of the specific interpretations; that the stipulation that evidence produced as part of an “official act” is protected and this could apply to situations such as the Nixon tapes.
#2 responds that the majority ruling raises the bar for introducing evidence because it seems like Nixon and Ford sure thought that presidents were not immune from criminal prosecution for official acts; adding that Ford's pardon itself implied Nixon was guilty, but that's not true if he enjoyed immunity.
#3 says that if Trump had an official call with a Prime Minister. Someone who had access to the information leaks that on the call in which he traded a tank for a Florida mansion he owns, one of many. The person asked if the transcript or recording of the call would be protected? Adding that that there might be no inquiry possible due to the ‘official nature’? That thought is scary.
# 4 says If one remembers the Nixon's interview where he said something like if the President does it, then it's not illegal. Nixon’s thoughts seemed to be there is no need for immunity if nothing you do as President is illegal.
# 4 adds that he believes that not throwing the book at Nixon is the reason why the country is in this position. Further adding how differently things would be if the Supreme Court had actual trial history related to prosecuting a President for official acts, i, e, Watergate.
I would say hundreds of years ago people like Locke and Voltaire wrote about the problems of power. Tolkien wrote about it, and it seems like this is just a human condition. Today we think politicians will solve all the issues, but for me things seem to be getting worse each day.
Why is the Supreme Court so mistrusted?
-
- First Presidency
- Posts: 812
- Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2023 1:55 am
- Location: Milky Way Galaxy
Re: Why is the Supreme Court so mistrusted?
I support the right to keep and arm bears.