587
submitted 7 months ago by DevCat@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

Former President Trump’s legal team suggested Tuesday that even a president directing SEAL Team Six to kill a political opponent would be an action barred from prosecution given a former executive’s broad immunity to criminal prosecution.

The hypothetical was presented to Trump attorney John Sauer who answered with a “qualified yes” that a former president would be immune from prosecution on that matter or even on selling pardons.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 71 points 7 months ago

Okay, Joe. You know what to do.

[-] medicsofanarchy@lemmy.world 14 points 7 months ago

Biden: If the Supreme Court agrees, take the shot.

[-] Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 9 points 7 months ago

He's known for a long time. But corporate Democrats only play hardball against progressives.

[-] pregnantwithrage@lemmy.world -5 points 7 months ago

This is a fucking wild comment. I couldn't have imagined this being the discourse we have as politically acceptable on either side. We are low-key driving off the cliff and going into civil war territory and I'm seeing it everywhere.

[-] charonn0@startrek.website 4 points 7 months ago

Live by the sword, die by the sword.

If you have a problem with this situation--and you should--then your argument is with the GOP and their reckless sword waving.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago

Do you really think I was serious when I suggested that Joe Biden go kill Trump? What's he going to do, talk him to death?

[-] pregnantwithrage@lemmy.world -4 points 7 months ago

Don't know but I can't recall a time where I was commenting online that I wanted someone to be assassinated. It's just weird to joke about but it's just so common now.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 6 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Then you don't remember the Obama years very well.

Also, maybe if Trump's lawyers didn't say a president could assassinate people, I wouldn't have joked about it.

[-] pregnantwithrage@lemmy.world -5 points 7 months ago

That's a poor reason to excuse joking about killing someone but it's so common now your excused I guess.

[-] YeetPics@mander.xyz 3 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

A political party's front-runner's lawyers are discussing the legality of a sitting president killing dissenters on US soil.

This is a perfectly fucking valid reason to make that joke.

Get over yourself.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago

Oh for god's sake, lighten up. People have told dark jokes for literally centuries.

[-] spacesatan@lemm.ee 2 points 7 months ago

I cannot imagine clutching pearls this hard over a joke about assassinating somebody who themselves is responsible for thousands or more deaths. The lives of killers are so precious they're above even jokes.

this post was submitted on 10 Jan 2024
587 points (97.4% liked)

politics

18586 readers
4306 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS