WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court declined Tuesday to revive a lawsuit filed by members of Congress against President Donald Trump alleging that he illegally profits off the presidency.
Love those right wing activist judges who make it clear that Republicans are above the law!
It’s now up to a Biden DOJ to pursue this case, among many, many others.
The corruption at SCOTUS is astounding. It now has one illegitimate justice and a rapist masquerading as a justice.
It has become a cabal of Republican party hacks and minions, a smelly and vile cesspool of christian extremists, white nationalists and Trump-family whores. Many disgusting pieces of excrement in that nasty port-a-potty. I am wondering how much and what these justices received from the Trump Organization, the Trump campaign and the Republican Party?
The high court said it would not hear a case
such a shame that our supreme court is now going to be operated under the pretense of, wait till trump calls and informs us on what to do.
the stupid leading the career activists protecting there lifetime appointments.
somehow, someway that playing field needs to be leveled out so the country and democracy has a chance of surviving.
So technically nobody in the whole country has standing to sue… and now it’s been 4 years and the case is moot.
That’s what corruption looks like. I wonder how these staunch ‘originalists’ can look themselves in the mirror and pretend they’re non-partisan. They look more like an illegitimate garbage fire today.
The fix is embedded so deeply at this point that it has to be surgically removed. What Republican judges and lawmakers have done over the last 4 years to protect a man that they all know is unfit for office has been a spectacle that I never thought I would see in my lifetime. Watergate actually revived my faith in American institutions at a time when it was at an all-time low. It is hard to imagine that ever happening again.
So at this point our federal system has good-government laws, but nobody can enforce them. That’s comforting.
We’ve never had an attorney general like this before,
we’ve never had a Surpreme Court like this before,
at least not in my life time.
They system can be corrupted, can be brought to it’s knees.
And, ~44% of the population is cheering.
Really dodged a bullet though didn’t we? I mean, those speeches at Goldman Sachs…
Hillary didn’t do well at fending off those criticisms, nor any others. She would have been a good president, but she was a weak candidate.
Yep, sure did dodge a bullet. Glad we cleared that up. From now on, the rule should be, let’s note vote for people who would be good presidents if they’re bad candidates when the other guy is a good candidate who would be a terrifyingly bad president, because hey, there’s nothing worse than someone who can’t defend themselves from a circular firing squad that prefers suicidal self-flagellation over making decisions based on practical realities. Unicorns over people, I always say…
Are you criticizing me for stating the obvious? Nobody here is a Trump supporter. The fact is she screwed the pooch with a weak campaign performance. She didn’t articulate a good defense for those criticisms. She couldn’t penetrate or compete with Trump’s smarmy charm-offense and his appeal to the dimwit misled millions out there. She took the midwest for granted. It was a tragedy. Hopefully America will recover.
Wrong. The “left” screwed the pooch with their self-righteous ideological non-voting and constant identity politics attacks on her. If it weren’t for people like Sarandon, we wouldn’t have a Trump presidency destroying everything. That is a FACT.
Both can be true. They’re not mutually exclusive. Peace.
So technically nobody in the whole country has standing to sue
How can a clause of the Constitution, or any statutory law, have any value if nobody has standing to sue? If the criterion is that some explicit “harm” is required, but the harm is only indirect, such as a result of an act or decision elicited by bribery, how can the “harm” be established? So contracts are made based on kickbacks. Is that a good way to motivate people to seek government office? What kind of officials will we get as a result? Ethics don’t really matter, right?
Just asking the so-called “judges”, rhetorically.
There are no two sides to numbers. Fact: we lost WI and MI because sore-loser BernieBot ideologues failed to show up to vote because they and their messiah spent the entirety of the primaries and general election demonizing her to the point where their hatred and petulance overcame any semblance of good sense and rational thought.
Also a fact: Putin did everything in his power to add to their self-righteous idiocy and convince them not to vote.
There are many other questions that a conservative SCOTUS will refuse to answer, like how a senate where 40% of the population controls 60%+ of the seats can ever be legitimate. A vote in Wyoming is weighed 67 times as heavily as one in California. That’s not democracy, it’s a farce. The short-term solution will be for DC and Puerto Rico to become states, but it’s still a flawed arrangement which they refuse to address - because of some sort of ‘originalist’ bullshit that doesn’t pass any smell-test.
The country originally had slaves, and no women had the vote.
They should be too ashamed to show their faces in public.
Some of them don’t know he’s unfit. They’re cult-members, which may be even worse.
Do they publish a vote count to show who voted how?
Bet this was a 5-3.