[Reason] Senator Schumer Goes Nuclear With "No King Act"

Government immunity is a fantastic concept broadly speaking. Doesn't mean I support abuses by public sector folks but if we opened all our government employees to civil liability based on the decisions they make at their job, we would absolutely destroy those services.

Even having a single lawsuit filed against you, even if its frivolous, would destroy the financial condition of most Americans.

Obama personally being dragged through the civil court system by the families/estates of every American he ordered killed would personally bankrupt him and quite quickly even if it was eventually found he wasn't liable because he "had good motives" or whatever.

 

I'm not going to argue with that stance. As I said, my view is the burden of proof should be on the executive branch that an extrajudicial killing is legally justified, and the scope for any exceptions given to the President (if there should be any) for the purposes of national security should be explicitly (and narrowly) defined.

 

Civil liability was already dealt with before the recent immunity decision.

 

Obama already had a built in legal defense in terms of the Authorization to use force in the war on terrorism. There was no such authorization regarding Trump’s actions yet the court is claiming that a president has expansive official actions without stating where those limits are.

 

They set up a secret court system that allowed them to address nat sec concerns. It was too secret and opaque, but did address the concern you made.

 

cops already gets away with the sht they do under "qualified immunity", this immunity under official act nonsense is gonna get abused.

 

The door has been opened… and the executive branch has gotten away exceeding its traditional authority…. and the SCOTUS has solid itself for political reasons… and now the House is trying to follow suit.

All of this stuff is dangerous but political fan boys are fine with it when it is for their side.

 

The President ****ed around and got away with it. The SCOTUS ****ed around and got away with it. Now the House wants to **** around and try and get away with.

Predictably those that were okay with the President and SCOTUS ****ing around suddenly don’t want the House to do it… and those upset the SCOTUS and President ****ed around are suddenly okay with the House doing it.

 

Hm

**** around….find out.

 

Bribery cases like this are no more due to SCOTUS ruling. Trump acting favorably toward Egypt is an official act and cannot be used as evidence. Thus, if there were an actual bribe, it would be extremely hard to prosecute.

Trump may have illegally accepted campaign donation from Egypt's Al-Sisi - The Jerusalem Post (jpost.com)

Egypt’s President Abdel Fatah Al-Sisi may have given former US President and current presidential candidate Donald Trump a $10 million cash boost for his 2016 campaign, according to a Washington Post investigation.

The investigation found that only five days before Trump became president, an organization linked to the Egyptian intelligence service, the Research and Studies Center, asked a state-run bank in Cairo to “kindly withdraw” nearly $10 million.

The center reportedly has no public profile, and US authorities suspected it was a front for Egypt’s intelligence service.

Bundles of $100 bills were placed into two bags, which were later carried off by four men, according to the Post.

The withdrawal was later discovered by US officials in 2019, which intensified an investigation previously launched into intelligence indicating Sisi wanted to donate millions to Trump.

In Trump’s final days of presidency, he reportedly injected $10 million of what was considered to be his own funds into his campaign, according to the Post.

Roadblocks in the investigation
The Post claimed that top Justice Department officials blocked prosecutors and FBI agents from obtaining bank records on the transaction, which people familiar with the case claimed held critical evidence.

“Every American should be concerned about how this case ended,” an anonymous person connected with the case told the Post. “The Justice Department is supposed to follow evidence wherever it leads — it does so all the time to determine if a crime occurred or not.”

Trump’s then-attorney general, William P. Barr, raised doubts that there was enough evidence against Trump. Barr also reportedly ordered FBI Director Christopher A. Wray to closely watch FBI agents “hell-bent” on pursuing Trump’s records, people familiar with the exchange told the Post.

A spokesperson for Trump’s campaign told the Post that this was a “textbook Fake News.”

“The investigation referenced found no wrongdoing and was closed,” spokesman Steven Cheung said by email. “None of the allegations or insinuations being reported on have any basis in fact. The Washington Post is consistently played for suckers by Deep State Trump-haters and bad faith actors peddling hoaxes and shams.”

The Egyptian government declined to comment.

Despite Trump’s campaign denying the validity of the investigation, the Washington Post said it interviewed more than two dozen people with knowledge of the case and reviewed thousands of pages of government records and court filings.

 

I finally read the proposed "No King Act" legislation. Very much doubt it would survives a court challenge, if it ever becomes law.

Unfortunately, probably the only way to reverse the extreme SCOTUS ruling is either through an amendment or a future court overturning it.

 

the Democratic Party has left me
-Joe Budden