TLDR: there are no qualifying limitations on presidential immunity

Not only does any US president now have complete immunity from “official” actions(with zero qualifying restrictions or definitions), but if those actions are deemed “unofiicial”, no jury is legally allowed to witness the evidence in any way since that would interfere with the now infinitely broad “official” presidential prerogatives.

Furthermore, if an unofficial atrocity is decided on during an official act, like the president during the daily presidential briefing ordering the army to execute the US transexual population, the subsequent ordered executions will be considered legally official presidential acts since the recorded decision occurred during a presidential duty.

There are probably other horrors I haven’t considered yet.

Then again, absolute immunity is absolute immunity, so I don’t know how much threat recognition matters here.

If the US president can order an action, that action can be legally and officially carried out.

Not constitutionally, since the Constitution specifically holds any elected politician subject to the law, but legally and officially according to the supreme court, who has assumed higher power then the US Constitution to unconstitutionally allege that the US President is absolutely immune from all legal restrictions and consequences.

  • gh0stcassette@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    He’s polling worse than “generic Democrat” and he can barely form a coherent sentence. Fundamentally, I just don’t believe there is a person who would vote for Biden, but not Harris or Whittmer or whoever, but there’s lots of people who lack confidence in Biden and would be more likely to vote if someone else was nominated.

    • Varyk@sh.itjust.worksOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Presidential polls are absurd propaganda at this point, and I guess you’re referring to the same two clips fox news hasn’t stopped running since the debate rather than to his obvious first term track record of “being old and still reliably and actively passing progressive legislation”.

      He already won against trump, he regularly passes progressives legislation, you vote for Biden and get Harris anyway if you want a backup.

      I can’t imagine how abandoning a proven candidate who beat trump before inspires political confidence if you haven’t been successfully manipulated to trust in the reliability of conservative media instead of years of reality.

      • gh0stcassette@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        The leaked internal DNC poll is what I’m referencing here. Why would the poll conducted under the direct supervision of the DNC for their own personal use be exaggerating Biden’s weakness?

        • Varyk@sh.itjust.worksOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          Likely the same reason you believe replacing a successful incumbent with “generic Democrat” is politically advantageous: manipulated faith in popular conservative media.