Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(MSN)   Trump's lawyers came right out and asked the Supreme Court to make him king. Thomas already thinking, "Sure, why not?"   (msn.com) divider line
    More: News, United States Congress, Supreme Court of the United States, Donald Trump, President of the United States, lower court rulings, Supreme Court, position Trump's lawyers, political motives  
•       •       •

7212 clicks; posted to Politics » on 12 May 2020 at 3:14 PM (3 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



171 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2020-05-12 2:30:11 PM  
That is literally what they're asking: for him to be completely and utterly above the law. It's just so farking un-American. Yet 40 percent of Americans (and 99.9 percent of republicans in congress) will be fine with it.
 
2020-05-12 2:37:09 PM  
i.imgur.comView Full Size
 
2020-05-12 2:38:18 PM  
So in this administration, we've had lawyers who tried to argue that the government shouldn't be required to supply the children they lock up with beds, toothbrushes and basic medical care, and lawyers who argue the President should be completely above the law.

I didn't think my opinion of lawyers could get lower than it already was, but holy fark, this is ridiculous.
 
2020-05-12 2:40:16 PM  
You say you got a real solution
Well, you know
We'd all love to see the plan
You ask me for a contribution
Well, you know
We're all doing what we can
But when you want money for people with minds that hate
All I can tell you is, brother, you have to wait

You say you'll change the constitution.
Well you know
We all want to change your head
You tell me its's the institution,
Well, you know
You better free your mind instead
 
2020-05-12 2:44:35 PM  
But there's one thing Trump can't claim immunity from: the voters.

Oh, you sweet summer child.
 
2020-05-12 2:47:28 PM  
I'd love to know if any of the justices asked Trump's lawyers to square their arguments with Trump's recent demands that Obama be prosecuted for allegedly abusing his power going after the Trump campaign.

They'd have to come up with something better than IOKIYAR, but we all know that's the long and short of it.
 
2020-05-12 3:04:54 PM  

gilgigamesh: I'd love to know if any of the justices asked Trump's lawyers to square their arguments with Trump's recent demands that Obama be prosecuted for allegedly abusing his power going after the Trump campaign.

They'd have to come up with something better than IOKIYAR, but we all know that's the long and short of it.


"Trump's people are the right kind of people... rich, so therefore they should be above all laws.  This guy who is half Kenyan, well... I mean, he is not even Puerto Rican.  And it is not like we will evar have a Puerto Rican President..."

Six years later, *bam* AOC wins a presidential bid.
 
2020-05-12 3:09:26 PM  
Hey Trump:
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-05-12 3:17:45 PM  
Stick a fork in America. She's done.
 
2020-05-12 3:17:46 PM  
"King" is incorrect.  He's aspiring to be a dictator.
 
2020-05-12 3:18:32 PM  
Sekalow is a pile of capybara poop.
 
2020-05-12 3:20:41 PM  

gilgigamesh: I'd love to know if any of the justices asked Trump's lawyers to square their arguments with Trump's recent demands that Obama be prosecuted for allegedly abusing his power going after the Trump campaign.

They'd have to come up with something better than IOKIYAR, but we all know that's the long and short of it.


They've thought of that. They conceded that a president can be prosecuted after he leaves office, but also effectively claimed Donnie could seize power and stay in office (and be immune) and no one can stop him.
 
2020-05-12 3:20:49 PM  
The frightening thought is SCOTUS is compromised enough that they might actually vote in favor of it.
 
2020-05-12 3:20:54 PM  
Hey kids!  It's time for another rousing game of "but what if Obama did it?"

...fark I miss him.
 
2020-05-12 3:21:03 PM  
Is there a chance SCOTUS decides to make this a narrow ruling?  That's scarier to me than anything.
 
2020-05-12 3:21:29 PM  

Driedsponge: So in this administration, we've had lawyers who tried to argue that the government shouldn't be required to supply the children they lock up with beds, toothbrushes and basic medical care, and lawyers who argue the President should be completely above the law.

I didn't think my opinion of lawyers could get lower than it already was, but holy fark, this is ridiculous.


To be faaaaair... there's lawyers arguing for the other side too, and for a lot less money.
 
2020-05-12 3:21:56 PM  

GardenWeasel: But there's one thing Trump can't claim immunity from: the voters.

Oh, you sweet summer child.


This.

The only thing I can adds is, "this guy? President Lysol is the dime store anti-Christ repubs are willing to enslave themselves to?"
 
2020-05-12 3:22:15 PM  

emersonbiggins: Is there a chance SCOTUS decides to make this a narrow ruling?  That's scarier to me than anything.


Clinton vs Jones was. 9-0 decision so I suspect this will be a narrow 5-4 ruling with Roberts doing the right thing for once..

/please?
 
2020-05-12 3:22:34 PM  
His lawyer put in the word temporary.  What's wrong with that you libby libs?
 
2020-05-12 3:23:36 PM  
SICK SAMPER TIRE ANUS
 
2020-05-12 3:23:58 PM  
Kavanaugh is having a hard time eliciting the responses he needs to rule in favor of Trump. He asked a lot of procedural questions so he can get out on a technicality and still go the way they told him to, I assume whoever paid off his credit card debt recently sent him a message.
 
2020-05-12 3:24:07 PM  
At least until they shatter that last bit of faith, I have to believe that even the conservatives on the Supreme Court recognize that the President shouldn't have unlimited power and immunity from oversight. Maybe Kavanaugh is a total bootlicker for executive power, but at least one of the others will probably show some sense of rationality. If nothing else, they have to consider that they'd be giving this kind of authority to every future President, even ones they don't agree with.
 
2020-05-12 3:25:24 PM  
Thomas already thinking, "Sure, why not?"

Not just him. There are at least three other justices who are a lock to vote in Drumpf's favor. Roberts is the only one I'm not entirely sure about.
 
2020-05-12 3:25:28 PM  

PanicAttack: The frightening thought is SCOTUS is compromised enough that they might actually vote in favor of it.


Justice Kegstand will for sure. Probably Alito and Thomas too. I hope the rest eviscerate it.
 
2020-05-12 3:25:54 PM  

danielem1: Kavanaugh is having a hard time eliciting the responses he needs to rule in favor of Trump. He asked a lot of procedural questions so he can get out on a technicality and still go the way they told him to, I assume whoever paid off his credit card debt recently sent him a message.


Hey, man, do you have any idea how hard it's gonna be to unload baseball tickets this season? Sheesh, give a guy a break.
 
2020-05-12 3:26:04 PM  
Be very farking careful what you wish for, assholes!
 
2020-05-12 3:26:13 PM  
When your client can't not break the law, you pretty much have to argue that he's above it.
 
2020-05-12 3:26:26 PM  
Boy it'd be really nice if they could just impeach every farking judge that said this was okay. I'd think it was proof enough that they fail at constitutional interpretation forever if they try and label the President as King.

But that would require 2/3 of the Senate, and even in the best circumstances you'd never get enough Republicans to willingly vote out two judges that they just put in less than 5 years ago. Any shame the party had was burned out by Trump's stupidity and McConnell's villainy a while back.
 
2020-05-12 3:26:32 PM  

FlashHarry: That is literally what they're asking: for him to be completely and utterly above the law. It's just so farking un-American. Yet 40 percent of Americans (and 99.9 percent of republicans in congress) will be fine with it.


Emphasis mine.

Vlod • 34 minutes ago
America is safe today because we have a Leader in the White House. Get on your knees and thank God. Trump does not think he acts. We will all be just fine. God Bless America.
 
2020-05-12 3:26:44 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-05-12 3:27:34 PM  

NobleHam: At least until they shatter that last bit of faith, I have to believe that even the conservatives on the Supreme Court recognize that the President shouldn't have unlimited power and immunity from oversight. Maybe Kavanaugh is a total bootlicker for executive power, but at least one of the others will probably show some sense of rationality. If nothing else, they have to consider that they'd be giving this kind of authority to every future President, even ones they don't agree with.


But if all the future Presidents are republican...
 
2020-05-12 3:27:40 PM  

no_tan_lines: You say you got a real solution
Well, you know
We'd all love to see the plan
You ask me for a contribution
Well, you know
We're all doing what we can
But when you want money for people with minds that hate
All I can tell you is, brother, you have to wait

You say you'll change the constitution.
Well you know
We all want to change your head
You tell me its's the institution,
Well, you know
You better free your mind instead


Free your mind, and your a$$ will follow
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-05-12 3:28:01 PM  
Has anyone been keeping tabs on Keggerbros' credit card bills lately?
 
2020-05-12 3:28:11 PM  

NobleHam: ited power and immunity from oversight. Maybe Kavanaugh is a total bootlicker for executive power, but at least one of the others will pro


Not really, republicans always think they can come back to ask the question again to be decided the other direction by relying on the morality of the democrats to eat their own when morality requires it.

Morality also requires that you take a sociopathic menace to society out back behind the woodshed and put it down like a sick animal for the protection of others, but we never seem to make it that high up the morality ladder.
 
2020-05-12 3:28:14 PM  
George III smirks deceasedly.
img.timeinc.netView Full Size

media.salon.comView Full Size
 
2020-05-12 3:28:32 PM  
I didn't know we had a king. I thought we were an autonomous collective.
 
2020-05-12 3:29:35 PM  

vrax: Be very farking careful what you wish for, assholes!


The Djinn agrees with your assessment of the situation.
 
2020-05-12 3:29:37 PM  

NobleHam: At least until they shatter that last bit of faith, I have to believe that even the conservatives on the Supreme Court recognize that the President shouldn't have unlimited power and immunity from oversight. Maybe Kavanaugh is a total bootlicker for executive power, but at least one of the others will probably show some sense of rationality. If nothing else, they have to consider that they'd be giving this kind of authority to every future President, even ones they don't agree with.


Can't they 2000 Florida it and just say this only applies to right now and doesn't set a precedent? That's a 'narrow ruling', right law-talking folks?
 
2020-05-12 3:32:12 PM  
kings die from plagues, right?
 
2020-05-12 3:32:16 PM  

gilgigamesh: I'd love to know if any of the justices asked Trump's lawyers to square their arguments with Trump's recent demands that Obama be prosecuted for allegedly abusing his power going after the Trump campaign.

They'd have to come up with something better than IOKIYAR, but we all know that's the long and short of it.



Had I been a justice at that moment, "So Barack Obama could have strolled into Senate Chambers and beaten Mitch McConnell to death with a shillelagh, and walk away without being charged?"
 
2020-05-12 3:32:27 PM  

neapoi: emersonbiggins: Is there a chance SCOTUS decides to make this a narrow ruling?  That's scarier to me than anything.

Clinton vs Jones was. 9-0 decision so I suspect this will be a narrow 5-4 ruling with Roberts doing the right thing for once..

/please?


Anything other than a unanimous decision would be a loss for the republic.  However, time and time again conservatives have proven to have zero foresight, so I have full faith Justice Kegstand and the others to do the wrong thing, to which I say: "Go for it, chuckleheads*."

*and kiss Burisma goodbye.
 
2020-05-12 3:32:30 PM  
My armchair prediction:

House case - SCOTUS rules against House narrowly, 5-4
NYS case - SCOTUS rules for NYS 7-2, minimum (Thomas/Kavanaugh dissent)
 
2020-05-12 3:32:33 PM  

palelizard: NobleHam: At least until they shatter that last bit of faith, I have to believe that even the conservatives on the Supreme Court recognize that the President shouldn't have unlimited power and immunity from oversight. Maybe Kavanaugh is a total bootlicker for executive power, but at least one of the others will probably show some sense of rationality. If nothing else, they have to consider that they'd be giving this kind of authority to every future President, even ones they don't agree with.

Can't they 2000 Florida it and just say this only applies to right now and doesn't set a precedent? That's a 'narrow ruling', right law-talking folks?


If they go so far as to say that Trump and his administration are above the law, there's literally no way it can be made as a 'narrow ruling'.  If they decide in his favor, we no longer have a government of the people.  We have a dictatorship in all but name.
 
2020-05-12 3:33:39 PM  
The White House wants to be immune from criminal and congressional investigation.  SCOTUS ruled over 20 years ago that the Prez is not immune to civil suits, so I don't see how they can give more weight and importance to civil suits and at the same time say he can't be investigated for criminal wrongdoing.  This was a dumbass case from dumbasses (Sekulow, really???)
 
2020-05-12 3:34:00 PM  

quiotu: Boy it'd be really nice if they could just impeach every farking judge that said this was okay. I'd think it was proof enough that they fail at constitutional interpretation forever if they try and label the President as King.

But that would require 2/3 of the Senate, and even in the best circumstances you'd never get enough Republicans to willingly vote out two judges that they just put in less than 5 years ago. Any shame the party had was burned out by Trump's stupidity and McConnell's villainy a while back.


Or you know they wanted a king? Let the king deal with these scum the way a king would : public hangings
 
2020-05-12 3:34:06 PM  

PanicAttack: The frightening thought is SCOTUS is compromised enough that they might actually vote in favor of it.


The red "Oh Fark" bar needs to be flashing for this comment.
 
2020-05-12 3:34:16 PM  
But there's one thing Trump can't claim immunity from: the voters.

Don't worry, Russian interference and GOP voter suppression will take care of them.
 
2020-05-12 3:34:31 PM  

Jake Havechek: Sekalow is a pile of capybara poop.


What capybara poop may look like:
Fark user imageView Full Size


What capybara poop may look like in a suit:
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-05-12 3:35:00 PM  
It's too bad Obama never actually attempted anything like this. Republicans were afraid to death that he would, and their hard NO to him might have set a precedent. But Obama never tried to be a king. Oh well.

Oh who am I kidding, precedent doesn't matter anymore either.
 
2020-05-12 3:35:30 PM  
Biz biz biz biz you finally got it.
 
Displayed 50 of 171 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter




In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.