₦airaland Forum

ijebosb:
Ok, still waiting for that link with someone who agrees with you on you interpretation of this Immunity ruling or your view of what is going on in America right now.

I have given you the Biden I want to give you. If that's not good enough for you buda lives.

ijebosb:
You mean this one?
The one where Biden agreed with Sotomayer's dissent? The dissent you called apocalyptic?
The one where Biden sounds almost like me, warning about the path the Supreme Court had been on?
I told you to link me a commentary from someone you agree with that agrees with your perspective.
This isn't it.

...

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2024/07/01/remarks-by-president-biden-on-the-supreme-courts-immunity-ruling/

Yes, Ijebo, that same one where he is telling We The People what should be done to save America from dump.

ijebosb:
I hear you. Unfortonetely your perspective from across the Pond is not the perspective of concerned Americans here like Biden who said he agreed with Sotomayor's dissent. You seem to have a desire to believe it's not as bad as it is. Go on.

It may seem to you that I "believe it's not as bad as it is", but this is so bad, its almost comical.

Imagine. Before this dump cretin became president, he already believed he can grab pussy and shoot people on fifth avenue and be immune and get away with it, and now a whole supreme court of the United States of America have sided with him and given him immunity! Can it possibly get worse? Yes it can. If We The People endow him with immunity by electing him come November.

My future is in the hands of Ijebosbs like you. Your fear of how bad it is and might get is like a fuel rod up your backside that will save me from dump's second term wrought.

Vote Blue and save America for me please.
My faith in you is unwavering and undying.

ijebosb:
Why don't you do this. Find me one political commentator you respect that shares your opinion.
Link their piece here.

Go and listen to Biden's last speech. He is calling on We The People to dissent and pass judgement on dump.

ijebosb:
Your understanding of act is limited in terms of the legal sense. You are given immunity for all consequences surrounding your official act. It's a broad immunity or else it wouldn't be immunity. Similar to the immunity Congresspeople have in Congress. A Congressperson can literally read a classified document on the House floor that has nothing to do with any bill being proposed and there would be nothing the government could do as the Speech and Debate clause is that broad.

You are arguing the concept of immunity. Do a study on the concept and you'll understand where you are going astray and the purpose.

And you are limiting yourself from recognising whom this supposed immune potus will presumably be immune from, and do not realise he may not be immune from the wrath of We The People.

In a sense, it's like what's happening with Roe v Wade. The Scotus said the people should decide and many people in many states are deciding to abort. Same as We the People will decide if they want an immune president come November or not.

ijebosb:
The President via 'Article II, Section 2, Clause 1' has the Core Constitutional Power to be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy. Now Roberts in this Ruling says that when using that Constitutional Authority, POTUS has absolute immunity (section of quote you thought was so important). So any time POTUS uses that power to command the Army of Navy, POTUS has absolute immunity.
Now imagine POTUS knows that a political opponent is in a particular building overseas. POTUS intends to kill that opponent. POTUS tells Seal team Six that there is a terrorist in that building and to drone fire that building. They do. Opponent killed.
By this ruling, POTUS was using one of their Core Constitutional authorities. So POTUS is immune. Even more so, per this ruling, no one can even question the motivation of why POTUS wanted to drone that building in the first place. Bold action indeed. lol.

You really are funny. Potus is obviously not going to be immune from the judgement of the supporters of the opponent he killed now, would he? And if those opponents manage to get some of his supporters to see as they see and become the majority, will we not not elect that person?

I have faith that We the People of the USA will continue to "hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" and that it is unacceptable for any potus to disendow anyone of their unalienable Rights of Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness just because you don't like the shirt they wear or even for no motive whatsoever. But if the USA has become so maga that they forgot this, then you all deserve the misery you get to be frank, and in heaps of spades too.

ijebosb:
You still don't understand it.
The constitution gives the POTUS the Power to control the military.
What he does with it is his motivation.

What he does with it is not his motivation!

If a president kills someone with the official military or a car he is officially driving because he does not like the shirt the person is wearing, as you presented, his motivation is the dislike for the shirt, which you are saying can't be questioned, while his unofficial act is the killing of the person, which is a crime that will be questioned and which he can be charged for.

Not being able to present the motivation of disliking a shirt before a court does create some difficulty, of course, especially if he claims it was official duty, but this ruling has simple made it such that a district judge must first rule if the killing is official or not, and if the judge rules unofficial, the charge goes ahead.

Now, there's this super jury of a majority called We The People who will judge this president unofficial or not. We all saw the evidence on Jan6 televised live on our tellies and will vote if we like what we saw or not. And if the majority of us think his killing someone is official and legal, we will gladly elect the killer, signifying not guilty, but if we don't like the killing of people we will not elect the guilty criminal.

Or don't you have any faith in We The People of the Federal Republic of the United States of America?

Scientheosopher:
Hasn't that being going on? For example, Investigative journalist, David Hundeyin informed us via X, newspapers, etc about the drug case of President BAT, his philosophy of "What money can't do, more money can do", multi-million naira houses bought under two of his younger children, the Nigerian Air scam, etc yet people who call themselves "educated and smart" still voted and are openly supporting him.

Our problem isn't lack of education; our problem is we haven't suffered enough. And we haven't suffered enough because we largely believe all consequences can be begged, payed, prayed or sacrificed away.

On Europeans victory, it's because they don't have a place to go to; they consider Africa inferior continent/race.

And since it's less stressful to immigrate than educate willful ignoramuses, the fortunate ones take that path.

The bold is a consequence of the lack of education required to use our senses correctly, such that, instead of feeding (and ruling ourselves) with the sweat of our brow (and the knowledge and intelligence in our heads), we ignorantly beg and pray for manna from heaven and suffer and starve.

Hogwarthtrades:
update on recent events @maureensylvia ??

+1

Goodvibes007:
Yes. King Biden currently trending on American twitter.

Nairaland is the only SM website that the majority loves Trump.

Didn't find much.

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/opinion/columnist/2024/07/01/supreme-court-decision-trump-presidential-immunity/74268851007/

greggng:
Are you talking to a child . Something that was televised for the whole world to see on cnn. In the history of America have you witness where a particular president supporters took over the national assembly ...killed police office who tried to stop them
Even attempted to kill Mike pence. He was saved by quick intervention of fbi... Anyways you can go tell naive people that it never happened not me .I am done talking

I think they thought you were sleeping when it was broadcast live on telly.

I'm pleased to see you beleful.

ayjay45, you no even straight.

ayjay45:
Is it possible. Or guys are either straight or gay

ijebosb:
Here is a good thread if you want to understand why your "We the People" argument falls flat.
https://x.com/Mike_Podhorzer/status/1807816938589991189

https://www.weekendreading.net/p/tipping-the-scales-the-maga-justices

The link above is from you tweet showing this goes back to Bush v Gore, and that I've been observing since the 39th. You should have seen me Tea Party. It felt like my world would end then Obama.

The United States of America is a democracy of We The People who elect those who govern, so if We The People want a shoot people kind of president that's what gets elected, and if they don't want they vote something else. It really is as simple as that in my view.

Good thing now is more eyes get to see what's being going on and get to decide if they want it.

ijebosb:
If that's not ur understanding, your understanding is wrong. At this point, you are arguing the definition of immunity or simply don't understood the ruling. It's the top line summation of the decision.

PDGguy posted a summation of the ruling.

The below is the conclusion of the post you selectively quoted:

PDPGuy:
10. Implications:
- The decision significantly alters the landscape of Presidential accountability and raises complex questions about the balance of power between branches of government.
- It leaves many open questions about how to categorize Presidential actions and when immunity applies, which lower courts will now have to grapple with.

And here is a further post by the same person where Secret Service is (use of) "official duty".

PDPGuy:
The delineation between “official” and “unofficial” acts would rest with the DC District court. But as raumdeuter suggested, I would think that Judge Chutkin (of the DC District Court) would likely find that Trump, asking a Secret Service agent to assassinate a rival candidate for president, would fall under “unofficial acts”.

Obainoman6:
Op give me your number mek i hang your legs nack you.

You chop too much?

Obainoman6:
like this they have not paid me salary i just went to withdraw my last money to eat today and i still have like 8 days to go before am paid.
I don't have anything to depend to no food at home, no gari, currently am eating my last meal cos from tomorrow no food anymore.
I don't have anyone to fall back to, no mama no papa and I don't know who to borrow from.
Please help me guys to eat, anything at all at all is not small please God will bless you.
9022656878 moniepoint

Biden ended his speech with the more appropriate rally call for Liberal Democrats, as opposed to a dumptatorship.

November we decide if We The People dissent.

ijebosb:
So, the Supreme Court decided that the president's ability to make bold decisions as long as it's via some official act is more important than any laws that may be broken.

Let us assume this view above is true.

Are you asking buda to have so little faith that a line won't be drawn by We The People when the president of the United States stands immune on Fifth Avenue and shoots someone?

ijebosb:
But now the Supreme Court just bestowed immunity for official acts. So even if they are impeached and removed. As long as it's an official act they won't be prosecuted.

Just heard this on CNN too, but its not an understanding I share and its based on the sky falling, a feeling I know you share.

Dump is the first president ever in almost 250 years to have been indicted for crimes in office, and even if he wins in November and does lots more crimes, his time will be done and be over and 2 in 250 years is good innings, the like I'd bet money on. If my country Nigeria hit those sort of odds, I'd say we done good.

You said "this Supreme Court does not represent the majority", and thankfully, that majority is determined at elections by We The People voting.

If We The People want our president to be immune for ordering the National Guard to shoot people, a thing I see dump doing when we Black Lives Matter and My Body My Choice and Charleston, then that's what we'd elect. And if We The People don't want that sort of president we'd elect someone else.

Or is We The People now so maga that no one would see the emperor is naked in the United States of America?

The fear bit I do understand I daresay. If Biden had done a good debate, this judgement would have been a win I'm sure. But we now on wobbly ground come November, sadly.

ijebosb:
Can I be honest, you sound as if you don't have enough understanding of this topic to even post remotely intelligently on it. This post is silly. It's clear u don't understand immunity or impeachment. Impeachment is a political process. Immunity means no one can prosecute him. I can repeat this a nother 5 times and you'll continue repeating the same lie.

Do some reading on this topic because u are spreading misinformation.

I read.

In the United States, impeachment is a remedial rather than penal process,[14][15]: 8  intended to "effectively 'maintain constitutional government' by removing individuals unfit for office";[15]: 8  persons subject to impeachment and removal remain "liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law."[15]
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment

Explain how a president is immune from the bold please.

GenFunction:
So lawless fam

Yes. Indeed I am lawless, and my fam too is lawless. Fam being what may best be described as my collective unconsciousness.

Thankfully, my generation is dying and a new better generation is kicking us out.

raumdeuter:
Since the rule was made today

I expect Trump to declare himself president tomorrow and Biden to announce he has won the November election since that's what they claim the scotus said

I hate dump so much I can't write his name right, so I've written to Biden to use his official powers to just cancel the November election and declare his second term starts now.

"We just have to remember who the hell we are. We are the United States of America. There is nothing — nothing, nothing — beyond our capacity — nothing — when we do it together. And we plan on doing that. You’re allowing me to do that".

President Joe Biden.

ijebosb:
It was an example.
I think you are having a hard time grasping the concept of immunity, or official acts or presidential core powers.
If they are immune, they can be impeached but not prosecuted by ANYONE, no matter who asks.

Your example was a bad example.

If a president is impeached, it is because their act is considered to be "Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors. U.S. Const. art. II, § 4", which is illegal and not an official act, so they can be prosecuted, is what you miss.

ijebosb:
Those people have won. The Court does not represent a majority of the US population.

Ijebos, those people have not won. If anything, they won a battle, and I'm arguing they haven't, note. They definitely have not won the ongoing war. And seriously, I do hate when you make it sound like you are weak and have lost, when I know you will fight till your dying breath and even your rotted bones so they lose!

If Americans agree with you that "The Court does not represent a majority of the US population", then the majority of the US population just need to elect people who represent them so judges who represent them get to be placed in the court.

It is a democracy after all, no?

ijebosb:
That should have been "Powers defined for the President"
Simple ex.
Say if the Constitution says a Presidential act is driving.
Now, while the President is driving, he decides to kill someone because he doesn't like the shirt they are wearing.
He is immune from Prosecution. Why?
Because he is perfuming a Constitutional defined power, driving.

Stop right there! Lol!

Where does his "perfuming a Constitutional defined power, driving" include "kill someone"?

Dude please, you live in America, and you should know that even if a president is not charged in court for killing someone because of the shirt they wear, Congress may decide to impeach that president and ask for their prosecution. And even if Congress don't, you still have the jury of We The People who may decide to find that president guilty and punish all those Congress members for not performing their duty of protecting the Constitution of the Unite State of America.

Or do you think a party not winning an election for a generation would not be a deterrent or punishment enough?

Or is it that you think the voters in America wouldn't mind electing presidents who kill people for the shirts they wear?

ijebosb:
The founders of the US, debated this. They wrote Congressional immunity into the Constitution but did not write in Presidential immunity. Purposefully. The country was founded on the ideal that no man is above the law. We have no Kings. The Supreme Court just changed that.

You should find a constitutional lawyer you respect and read some of their opinions on this.

This ruling has not placed any president above the law! It has just placed a president's official acts above the law. But you seem to think a president ordering the murder of their opponents by the military is an official act for some reason, and I do not agree with your understanding.

happney65:
But the constitution was clear on the transfer of power which Trump told his supporters to go and "Stop the steal" Isn't it? Did they not? Did Trump not try to stop it?

And that is precisely why he still has a case before U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan.

It is not his official duty to not uphold the Constitution of the United States of America that he swore to uphold. And in fact, not upholding the Constitution is a treasonable offence that the President is not immune from prosecution from whether acting officially or not. And I hope Jack Smith adds that to the charge if he hasn't already.

ijebosb:
Trump is not currently President so no.
And if Trump went and himself shot someone on Fifth ave he wouldn't have immunity.
But if he used an "official act" or a "Core Constitutional Power" to shoot someone of fifth ave, he would be immune.

I do not agree that a dump in office can claim he was performing his official duty if he shoots someone on fifth avenue and is therefore immune.

I do not believe America is so dumb and stupid that they would claim this ruling claims and accepts nonsense like that.

Even his acts in the current hearings before U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan still need to determine what is official or not, and I am willing to wait on her ruling instead of letting the sky fall on my head.

ijebosb:
Dems don't want Trump shot.
THe ruling requires an understanding of Constituionally defined Presidential powers or Core power.
Then it moves on to official acts.

The court has just said the powers defined by the President in the Constitution are Immune from prosecution. Period. So, it doesn't matter why he uses them they way he does because they are immune. In fact you can't even ask the motivations. So, it follows if one of his powers is controlling the military, he could tell them to do anything and no one could question him. Anything like kill a rival. You get.

The court has not "just said the powers defined by the President in the Constitution are Immune from prosecution"!

To start with, the president does not define his powers. The constitution does. And there's nowhere it says he can order the military to kill his rival!

Besides, simple reasoning would dictate that if what you claim is true, all acts of dump while in office are immune because he used presidential powers, but I'm certain he still has a case since:

"Instead, the high court's ruling sets the stage for hearings before U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan on what allegations in special counsel Jack Smith's indictment should be considered official acts and, therefore, potentially immune from prosecution".

Those that are considered unofficial, if any, will be prosecuted, if time allows of course.

happney65:
And Yes,With this ruling Trump has just been given a free pass to stay in power because he will claim being under official acts.

Sorry, but this is not true.

The president does not decide what official acts are. The Constitution of the United States of America does, and it clearly states when a president shall leave office.

ijebosb:
No he wouldn't as the parties are not the same.
At some point you are going to have to understand that.
Dems believe the shit they sell. Peace, Love, Democracy, rule of Law.
It's the reason Biden will let his son go to jail while Trump pardons everyone.

You're understanding of this ruling is off.
This is not hyperbole!!

So, you think this ruling gives dump the right to go shoot someone on fifth avenue and be immune because he is Republican?

I so wish dump agrees with you and goes to shoot someone on fifth avenue so we can see if it is hyperbole or not.

ijebosb:
That's a bad understanding of the Constitutional Powers and Presidential Duties.
Ex. The Constitution gives the President control over the military. By this ruling the motivations of he uses it can't be questioned.
If he wants to use his war powers to drone someone. Ey. That's his right. Lol
Read the ruling.

I have read the ruling in its entirety, but perhaps I missed the bit where the president is immune if he ordered the military to go shoot dump, so please show me that bit I missed pleased. I want dump shot!