Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 1 year ago, 3 minutes later, 13 minutes after the original post[^][v]#1,328,048
@previous (C) > anything you do
No, they said it only applied to duties that are part of the job as president.
> including assassinating rival
[citation needed] The citation will never come because the supreme court did not say it was ok to murder political rivals.
Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 1 year ago, 5 minutes later, 19 minutes after the original post[^][v]#1,328,049
@1,328,046 (C)
It protects anything Republicans do. If a Democrat tried to do anything, it would be challenged and eventually the supreme court would rule it illegal for whatever made up reason they come up with that day. The same will happen when a Republican tries it, except that the supreme court will allow it. This is the goal of stacking all three branches of government with fanatics.
Meta !Sober//iZs joined in and replied with this 1 year ago, 17 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,328,081
@1,328,048 (A)
Anon C watches the boomer box all day for his opinions. Don't expect any kind of reasoning that wouldn't fit in a half-remembered 10 second CNN soundbite.
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU joined in and replied with this 1 year ago, 9 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,328,085
@previous (Meta !Sober//iZs)
I mean to be fair Roberts wrote that official acts were immune and then sort of gave a vague list of things it included. I feel like if you are going to say "These are actions you can never face legal consequence for" there should be some specificity.
Meta !Sober//iZs replied with this 1 year ago, 2 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,328,089
@previous (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
Yeah but then the President could just make an Executive Order saying that killing rivals is, in fact, an official act and therefore be immune.
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 1 year ago, 3 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,328,090
@previous (Meta !Sober//iZs)
He could do that right now and as long as 5 justices on the Supreme Court are cool with it it's an official act, regardless of whether it "actually" is one. That is fundamentally the problem!