SC sides PRESIDENT TRUMP with IMMUNITY!!! Who dat wild man. Who dat wild man now!!!

[Thread]

LMVICTORIOUSAO!!!

[Thread]

[[[Scathing Sotomayor dissent: ‘The President is now a king above the law’]]]

(https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/trump-immunity-supreme-court-decision-07-01-24#h_970d5ce788355fc04d44ed8795e178fb)

Oh, dem grapes, oh, dem grapes is sour.

LMVICTORIOUSAO!!!

[Thread]

The best of the best...you managed to rob Trump's second term, but he'd already whooped the dog shit out of ya's thru that SC.

That old man wasn't fuckin' around. LOADED that SOB SC like a boss.

One after anothern went into that Oval..."It won't take long, I got McDonalds and the children waitin'. I need you to do this in order to get this job...blah, blah, blah...yes, or, no?"

"Yes. Mr. President. No problem, sir."

"You're hired. They'll validate your parking out there. I gotta go. Thank you."

Wet work, kids. Pure, unadulterated wet work..

[Blake]

No they didn't. Magatards struggle so hard with details.

[Thread]

No they didn't. Magatards struggle so hard with details.

He's not only got IMMUNITY now, Blake, he's got IMPUNITY.

ha, ha.

And nice of ya, Blake. to take me off your (to ignore list).

I ain't been offin' that thing is a coon's age.

[Thread]

https://media.cnn.com/api/v1/images/stellar/prod/9cb9103d-4f72-4522-a236-8dea75ba7e1c.jpg?c=original&q=w_480,c_fill
Vance, one of Trump's possible VP contenders, says immunity decision is a "massive win"From CNN's Morgan Rimmer and Kit Maher

[Thread]

[[[Supreme Court embraces Trump’s argument on chilling presidencyFrom CNN's John FritzeChief Justice John Roberts picked up and embraced one of the central themes raised by former President Donald Trump in his arguments: That allowing prosecutors to look back at actions taken by a former president would potentially chill his ability to do the job.
“A president inclined to take one course of action based on the public interest may instead opt for another, apprehensive that criminal penalties may befall him upon his departure from office,” Roberts wrote.
“And if a former president’s official acts are routinely subjected to scrutiny in criminal prosecutions, “the independence of the executive branch” may be significantly undermined.
More context: Throughout the course of the oral arguments in Apri (https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/25/politics/takeaways-trump-immunity-supreme-court/index.html)l, several justices were keen to separate the broader constitutional questions raised by the case from the specifics of Trump’s case. Their decision, they said, was focused on what happens in the future.
“The president is not above the law,” Roberts wrote. “But Congress may not criminalize the president’s conduct in carrying out the responsibilities of the executive branch under the Constitution.”
“The system of separated powers designed by the framers has always demanded an energetic, independent executive,” Roberts added. “The president therefore may not be prosecuted for exercising his core constitutional powers, and he is entitled, at a minimum, to a presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts.” ]]]

Who dat wild man!!! Who dat wild man now!!!

[Thread]

DONALD TRUMP (https://www.foxnews.com/category/person/donald-trump)
Trump touts Supreme Court's presidential immunity ruling as 'big win for our Constitution and for democracy'

Supreme Court rules Trump immune from criminal prosecution for 'official acts'



Published July 1, 2024 11:12am EDT

~~~~~~~~~

"How's that for wet work, huh."

[ducks]

the decision was not specific to Trump and he said the court’s ruling should not be viewed as partisan. “That immunity applies equally to all occupants of the Oval Office, regardless of politics, policy, or party,” he wrote.

[Thread]

the decision was not specific to Trump and he said the court’s ruling should not be viewed as partisan. “That immunity applies equally to all occupants of the Oval Office, regardless of politics, policy, or party,” he wrote.

hear, hear!

[Thread]

A might quiet in here of a Monday mornin', kids.

tee, hee.

[Thread]

House majority leader hails Supreme Court immunity decisionFrom CNN's Clare Foran[[[House Majority Leader Steve Scalise praised the Supreme Court’s immunity decision in a statement on Monday.
“With today’s decision, the Supreme Court concluded what we’ve known all along: a president cannot be prosecuted for his official acts. The weaponization of President Biden’s Department of Justice against President Trump is outrageous, unconstitutional, and must cease. While it’s becoming increasingly clear Democrats believe their only path to victory in November is through prosecuting their political opponent, today’s decision makes it clear this is not allowed in our constitutional system,” Scalise said.
GOP Sen. John Barrasso also hailed the Supreme Court’s decision as a “victory for democracy against Democrat lawlessness.”

“The election will be decided at the ballot box, not in a courtroom,” Barrasso wrote on social media (https://x.com/SenJohnBarrasso/status/1807802938963738900).]]]

hear, hear!!!

[Thread]

Rep. Jim Jordan slams special counsel Jack Smith following Supreme Court's Trump immunity decision


https://media.cnn.com/api/v1/images/dle/2024-07-01/b95238f0-8758-4083-aee9-7d7366cc3c3a.jpg?c=original&q=w_1280,c_fill
Rep. Jim Jordan attends a press conference on June 12, in Washington, DC.


Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan, a staunch ally of Donald Trump’s, has taken aim at special counsel Jack Smith following the Supreme Court’s decision that Trump could claim immunity for some actions he took while he was president.

Jordan called Smith “hyper-partisan” and claimed the decision showed he could not “weaponize the rule of law to go after the Administration’s chief political rival.”

“We hope that the Left will stop its attacks on President Trump and uphold democratic norms,” he wrote on X. (https://x.com/Jim_Jordan/status/1807789799962481005)


~~~~~~~~~

hear, hear!!!

[Tyronn Lue]

Dude why not just make notes in notepad since you're basically talking to yourself here?

[Thread]

Dude why not just make notes in notepad since you're basically talking to yourself here?

Uh, uh.

Let us proceed...

[lebomb]

Uh, uh.

Let us proceed...


Thread, you are alright man. I like ya for the most part. But you have to get off uh Trumps orange with the pubes swept to the side nuttsack. Its a bad look. :vomit:

[koriwhat]

Dude why not just make notes in notepad since you're basically talking to yourself here?

Why come in to such a thread if your reply is as worthless as yourself? You could easily just avoid this very thread but you're just like a woman and women love attention.

[koriwhat]

Of course TL's boyfriend would thumbs up his bitchass worthless reply. :lmao

[Tyronn Lue]

Why come in to such a thread if your reply is as worthless as yourself? You could easily just avoid this very thread but you're just like a woman and women love attention.
The only woman in your life is your mom, Joey. Pay attention to her.

[Thread]

The only woman in your life is your mom, Joey. Pay attention to her.

Amen. They'll come a day when you can't.

[koriwhat]

The only woman in your life is your mom, Joey. Pay attention to her.

It's funny you think you know me personally. Bro I'd give you 0 time of my day irl but here it's pretty entertaining to say the least.

You're simply projecting as usual because you truly wish everyone was a fucking incel like yourself TL. You're a bottom bitch loser bro. :lol

Keep acting like a bitch because we all know you have no clue how to be anything other than the weak fuck you are. :tu

[ChumpDumper]

^projecting

[Blake]

It's funny you think you know me personally. Bro I'd give you 0 time of my day irl but here it's pretty entertaining to say the least.

You're simply projecting as usual because you truly wish everyone was a fucking incel like yourself TL. You're a bottom bitch loser bro. :lol

Keep acting like a bitch because we all know you have no clue how to be anything other than the weak fuck you are. :tu


https://bingobaker.com/image/5909388/800/1/koriwhat-bingo.png

Will accept:
Make believe world
Bitch ass
Bitch
Nah bro
Weak males

[Donald Sterling.]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VOBXH-5QrGU&ab_channel=LoiterClips

[Thread]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VOBXH-5QrGU&ab_channel=LoiterClips
:lmao:lmao:lmao

[Thread]

LMVICTORIOUSAO!!!

[Thread]

3-RINGERS-3 to that SC.

Trump did that!!!

Who dat wild man!!!

[Thread]

Winester, FINALLY I get it...

"If I had a hammer I'd hammer in the morning...I'd hammer in the evening, all over this land..."



SUPREME COURT (https://www.foxnews.com/category/politics/judiciary/supreme-court)
'Big blow to big government': Major SCOTUS decision strips power of 'faceless leviathan' of federal agencies

Republicans praised the decision, saying the previous rule gave 'unelected bureaucrats' too much power


By Brianna Herlihy (https://www.foxnews.com/person/h/brianna-herlihy)
Fox News (https://www.foxnews.com/)
Published July 11, 2024 4:00am EDT



The Supreme Court (https://www.foxnews.com/category/politics/judiciary/supreme-court) this term took a HAMMER to decades-old legal doctrine that largely saved executive branch agencies in legal disputes. Now, experts say Congress and the next president will have no choice but to work more closely together and stop relying on the "faceless leviathan" of federal agencies.
In a David vs. Goliath dispute, a group of fishermen sued a government agency that mandated the fishermen pay $700 for "at sea monitors," arguing that the rule is out of the bounds Congress set for the federal agency.
The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the fishermen in a 6-3 decision (https://www.foxnews.com/us/supreme-court-appears-ready-reel-administrative-state-landmark-challenge-east-coast-fishermen) last month, and, in doing so, overruled what is known as the Chevron doctrine — a legal theory established in the 1980s that says if a federal regulation is challenged, the courts should defer to the agency’s interpretation of whether Congress had granted it authority to issue the rule, as long as the agency's interpretation is reasonable and Congress had not addressed the question directly.


Justices Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor dissented from the majority, warning that eliminating Chevron could give judges without expertise authority in legal disputes regarding regulation of food, medicine, the environment, etc.

SUPREME COURT SIDES WITH FISHERMEN IN LANDMARK CASE DECIDING FATE OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE STATE (https://www.foxnews.com/politics/supreme-court-sides-fishermen-landmark-case-deciding-fate-administrative-state)

(to be continued)

Trump did that.

[Thread]

(continued from above)

But conservatives and Republicans, who argued Chevron gave the government too much power to rule through bureaucratic red tape, praised the decision.
"The Supreme Court’s decision in Looper Bright v. Raimondo is a big win for the little guy and a big blow to big government. Power ought to reside with Americans and those they elect and not the faceless leviathan of 3 letter agencies that has thrived under Joe Biden," said Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Mo.
"I think what this decision should mean is that our elected leaders in Congress should be the ones who are making the laws that impact Americans' everyday lives, and not unelected bureaucrats in cubicles in Washington, D.C.," Casey Mattox, vice president of legal strategy at Stand Together, told Fox News Digital.
"It should mean the president having to work with Congress instead of just simply major swings from one direction to the other every four to eight years. That has not served America well," he said.
"Congress should not be passing the buck to unelected people to make the decisions," Mattox added. "And so, I think essentially what the decision to overturn Chevron means is that when Congress is passing laws, it needs to actually get the expertise it needs and then be politically accountable for the decisions it's making."

(to be continued)