Nick Anderson for July 01, 2024

  1. 704fe3d1 4a7d 495f a742 2d8456861f60
    admiree2  5 days ago

    Nicely done, Nick.

    Now let’s hope that the SCROTUS’ anointed king does not make you the first one to be shot in the middle of 5th Avenue…as part of his official duties of course.

     •  Reply
  2. Ddwiz avatar
    DD Wiz Premium Member 5 days ago

    With today’s ruling, the Roberts Kangaroo Cult has decreed the the president of the United States, currently one Joseph R Biden Jr, is immune from prosecution for any “official act.”

    For example, if Biden were to conclude, as an official act in protecting the national security of our nation, that one Donald J Trump, in calling for a suspension of the Constitution and declaring himself dictator “on day one” is an existential threat to the national security of our constitutional democratic republic and ordered Seal Team Six to eradicate that existential threat, Biden would have complete immunity.

     •  Reply
  3. De6fdbq 5e0a21ac bc2f 4b76 855c 395d2ca0924d
    NRHAWK Premium Member 5 days ago

    So…, does this mean that Biden in his “Official Duties” and as the top law enforcement officer declare tRump a clear and present danger to the country and throw him into Gitmo without liability? Not my first choice but hey, whatever is good for the goose…

     •  Reply
  4. Download
    Walter Kocker Premium Member 5 days ago

    But wait!

    There’s a chance forthcoming:

    WASHINGTON—Telling Americans that they must act now to avoid losing out on the chance of a lifetime, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas announced at a press conference Monday a 50% discount on all favorable rulings. “Today and today only, I’m offering half off on tilting any jurisprudence in your favor—all principles must go!” said the associate justice, who went on to list issues including abortion, voting rights, interstate commerce, social media regulations, and gun ownership by domestic abusers that could now be decided at a steep discount. “Brown v. Board of Education? Gone. Gideon v. Wainwright? Finito. Miranda v. Arizona. Poof! Just mention the code SCOTUS before your oral arguments and we’ll take it from there. Act soon, because this opportunity is running out!” Thomas added that if buyers jumped on this deal in the next hour, he would throw in a ruling overturning Loving v. Virginia’s interracial marriage protections for the low, low price of a single Rolex. – ONION

     •  Reply
  5. Agent gates
    Radish the wordsmith  5 days ago

    Would it be legal for Biden to have the military take out the corrupt right wing court?

     •  Reply
  6. 1
    ncorgbl  5 days ago

    Several have already suggested that the Supreme Court’s ruling applies today, not next January, and the sitting president today is Joe Biden. Declaring tRump a Clear and Present Danger to the United States of America and locking him up should be on the table. But then Biden must also charge the same to 6 Supreme Court Justices. The very ones who made this decision. Then charge the one who gave this Great Nation this mess, Mitch McConnell.

    In our history we’ve had the wealthy attempt to take our Nation away from WE, the People’ many times. WE, the People’ defeated the wealthy’s attempts. We declared Independence when WE, the People’ finally became fed up with a king’s dictatorship. As others have said, they will count on the honest people to not use the power they just gave. What they always fail to count on is a PO’d Liberal. In every war, every battle, every Law, every attempt to threaten our rights it was Liberals who rose up and defeated every enemy. They just PO’d the Liberals, again.

    Go get `em, Joe.

     •  Reply
  7. Missing large
    sincavage05  5 days ago

    The supreme court is bought and paid for a long time ago. He’s just collecting services due.

     •  Reply
  8. Rabbit hat
    s49nav  5 days ago

    “The President is not above the law. But Congress may not criminalize the President’s conduct in carrying out the responsibilities of the Executive Branch under the Constitution”

    Only in the eyes of a fool does this seem like an unreasonable statement.

     •  Reply
  9. Missing large
    sedrelwesley2 Premium Member 5 days ago

    make that 4: + DJT. Roberts & Thomarse

     •  Reply
  10. Erikeye
    tabby  5 days ago

    So, to those who think this is a “reasonable decision” – What “responsibilities of the Executive Branch under the Constitution” are so illegal that they must be covered by this decision?

     •  Reply
  11. Avt freyjaw nurse48
    FreyjaRN Premium Member 5 days ago

    Sir-Lies-A-Lot is getting good value from the justices he packed in the SCOTUS.

     •  Reply
  12. Note
    Slowly, he turned...  5 days ago

    There are many more voters in America that believe in democracy and law-and-order than those that don’t. We just have to vote in November! That will make Trump virtually irrelevant.

     •  Reply
  13. Cigar smoker
    Jack7528  5 days ago

    And you notice the ruling said nothing about impeachment so nothing has changed.

     •  Reply
  14. Missing large
    aristoclesplato9  5 days ago

    Dopey Dems brought this on themselves with their lawfare attack against Trump. And the President would not be immune from official acts. The trial would be in the Senate.

     •  Reply
  15. Cathy aack
    lindz.coop Premium Member 5 days ago

    I think Biden should order psych eval for any future presidential candidates.

     •  Reply
  16. Great view up here
    comixbomix  4 days ago

    A really GOOD REASON to be careful what sort of person we elect…“I have been here three years and three days, and I can tell you without hesitation: Being President of this country is entirely about character.” From ‘The American President’ – a film we perhaps should have paid more attention to.

     •  Reply
  17. Photo
    j.l.farmer  4 days ago

    Thanks to the Supreme Court……unfortunate for our country and our democracy!!

     •  Reply
  18. Bryce canyon
    dabishton Premium Member 4 days ago

    Q: Hey, Supreme Court: Falsifying business records, payoffs to influence an election, direct interference with an election, or insurrection against the United States – are these crimes?A: No, if it’s the President who commits them while in office. Yes, if it’s any other person in the United States.Q: Should Supreme Court members have any ethics or accountability rules?A: No. Who could enforce them, anyway?

     •  Reply
  19. Missing large
    CrossTieWalker Premium Member 4 days ago

    All those liberal tears sure are tasty

     •  Reply
  20. Frank gifford
    nyg16  4 days ago

    The Maga, corrupt, sub Supreme Court has just given their dear leader a road map to dictatorship if he becomes elected

     •  Reply
  21. Missing large
    dlw54650 Premium Member 4 days ago

    The difficulty with democracy, is that it was designed expecting that the leaders would be basically of good character, and that there would be “good men” in the other branches to act as a check on anyone who was corrupt.

    What to do when there is a whole group of corrupt individuals who have infiltrated the very fabric of our democracy?

    First, there are two bills that are being presented, one in the U.S. House of Representatives and one in the U.S. Senate to implement ethics rules and enforcement for SCOTUS.

    S.359 – Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency Act of 2023

    H.R.8098 – Judicial Ethics Enforcement Act of 2024

    Secondly, an Inspector General can be appointed to oversee SCOTUS.

    Thirdly, justices Alito, Thomas, and Roberts can be impeached.

    Unfortunately, all of these actions depend on a BLUE wave in November 2024 – U.S. presidency, House, and Senate

    Vote BLUE!

     •  Reply
  22. Missing large
    nodjt  3 days ago

    Where did these justices study law? Moscow? Kenya?

     •  Reply
  23. Missing large
    graystripemouse Premium Member 3 days ago

    So SAD.

     •  Reply
Sign in to comment

More From Nick Anderson