this post was submitted on 10 Jan 2024
576 points (97.4% liked)

politics

19120 readers
2984 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Former President Trump’s legal team suggested Tuesday that even a president directing SEAL Team Six to kill a political opponent would be an action barred from prosecution given a former executive’s broad immunity to criminal prosecution.

The hypothetical was presented to Trump attorney John Sauer who answered with a “qualified yes” that a former president would be immune from prosecution on that matter or even on selling pardons.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] BaddDadd@lemmy.world 62 points 10 months ago (4 children)

Ask him if that means Biden can assassinate Trump. Then remind him of the concept of estoppel. Then Biden comes to their first presidential debate and places a .44 Magnum handgun on the podium, to see if Trump runs away like the little bitch he is.

[–] gregorum@lemm.ee 17 points 10 months ago

“If Biden weren’t so weak, he’d assassinate me” is what he’s saying.

[–] Philo@sh.itjust.works 8 points 10 months ago (1 children)

.44 Magnum? Wouldn't a flame thrower be a bit more appropriate?

[–] TimLovesTech@badatbeing.social 10 points 10 months ago (2 children)

What good is fire against the anti-Christ? :P

[–] mrbubblesort@kbin.social 3 points 10 months ago (3 children)

yeah, most devils have fire and poison immunity. you're gonna need a silver weapon or something that does holy damage

[–] roguetrick@kbin.social 3 points 10 months ago

Agent 47's custom AMT hardballers to the rescue.

[–] Cosmicomical@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

Cold-wrought iron blade

[–] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Best I can do is a "Holy fuck, that's a big gun".

For example, the Pfeifer-Zeliska .600 Nitro Express Revolver. It takes British made rifle rounds, each costing $40.

Then there's the Magnum Research BFR, .45/70 Government. It, too, takes rifle rounds. You can even get the BFR in .30-30 Winchester if you want.

Note that shooting these handguns will require some serious arm and wrist strength, not something an older man would have. So best offload the task to his Secret Service.

In which case, you might as well just go for a rifle. In which case, I'd suggest the .950 JDJ If that doesn't count as holy damage, I don't know what would.

[–] Sanctus@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

I think the person you responded to is from a Salamander chapter.

[–] morphballganon@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago (3 children)

A .44 is excessive; Biden might not be strong enough to fire it safely.

A .357 would do.

[–] CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social 5 points 10 months ago (2 children)

wasnt the hypothetical along the lines of the president ordering a military unit to assassinate a rival? If one wanted to really invoke that, Biden wouldnt need to fire a gun at all, just have some tough looking and visibly armed soldier stand just offstage and stare menacingly

[–] baronvonj@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Not even a visible person, just a couple of red laser pointers aimed from a secure location.

Or they could have the debate on the middle of 5th Avenue in NYC and Biden could just make the finger guns at Trump every time Trump is speaking.

[–] WHYAREWEALLCAPS@kbin.social 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

The finger guns scene from The Losers comes to mind.

[–] hakunawazo@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

You mean like the finger gun scene in Expendables 2?

[–] BajaTacos@lemm.ee 8 points 10 months ago

He could even say something like, "Won't someone rid me of this me of this meddlesome jackass?"

[–] Garbanzo@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

Jesus Christ, do you want to see Trump splattered? We all know a 9mm will blow the lungs out, that should be plenty. That or a trusty shotgun, obviously, which we all know sends bad guys running just by loading the thing.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Fuck that. Point a .44 at him and say, "go ahead, make my day," like Dirty Harry.

[–] Pipoca@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

That doesn't quite work.

Trump's lawyers argument is that presidents are immune from criminal prosecution on any official act, even if that official act is illegal or unconstitutional; that the only remedy is impeachment.

The judge brought up ordering seal team 6 to assinate a rival as an example of an obviously illegal official act. Trump's lawyers response was "obviously he'd be impeached, but yeah, I guess if he weren't he'd be immune from prosecution".

Shooting Trump at the debate would be a prosecutable private action, according to Trump's lawyer. What Biden would have to do is to tell seal team 6 "If Trump gets on this stage, shoot him".