“(With) today’s Supreme Court decision on presidential immunity, that fundamentally changed. For all practical purposes, there are virtually no limits on what the president can do. It’s a fundamentally new principle and it’s a dangerous precedent because the power of the office will no longer be constrained by the law even including the supreme court of the United States.”

Throughout his address, Biden underscored the gravity of the moment, emphasizing that the only barrier to the president’s authority now lies in the personal restraint of the officeholder. He warned vehemently against the prospect of Trump returning to power, painting a stark picture of the dangers such an outcome could pose.

  • inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    139
    arrow-down
    23
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Dumbass and spineless Biden and Democrats. The supreme court literally just started that America had a king but this dumbass party would rather take some stupid fucking high road bullshit instead of playing the game to ensure the fascist fuck around and find out.

    They don’t even have to resort to assassinations, they could really tell the IRS to audit 501© and remove their status from the churches and bullshit Republican charities, or tell the justice department to focus on domestic terrorism and corruption to fuck over Republican groups and representatives, or tell the FDA to allow the sale of raw milk.

    Play the god damn game and be the fucking king if these corrupt justice says there’s a king.

    • Hugucinogens@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      59
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      That is a guaranteed path to fascism.

      I’m not gonna say that the chances are good, but if they refuse, and win, and then walk back the changes, maybe fascism can be averted.

      If they walk into using these tools and normalise them even more, then when the other party gets the government again, you get a republican fascist, and if the other party never gets the government again, it’s because you got a “democrat” fascist.

      Don’t race to the bottom, everyone loses there.

      • tigeruppercut@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        38
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        No, you use the fascist power granted by fascists to abuse the fascists who granted it in the first place. Power is the only thing that stops fascists. Start with a few nights in a black site for the justices who thought granting absolute power to the president was OK. If scotus already accepts fascism from their team it’s already too late for your plan to work.

      • Valmond@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        5 months ago

        So fascist powers for the fascists, but not for the non-fascists.

        Get rid of all thet right now with whatever means IMO.

          • Valmond@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            16
            ·
            5 months ago

            How on earth is it becoming a fascist because you remove pro fascist laws?

            That really is some mental gymnastics.

            • fine_sandy_bottom
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              14
              ·
              5 months ago

              Arbitrarily rewriting laws you don’t like sounds pretty fascist to me.

                • fine_sandy_bottom
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  I think people think of fascism as specifically “murdering minorities” or something rather than a form of autocracy.

                • fine_sandy_bottom
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  Of course it’s arbitrary.

                  It doesn’t take much self awareness to realise that having a president pick and choose which SCOTUS rulings they think are ok, is exactly the type of authoritarian autocrat you’re trying to avoid.

          • Xenny@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            5 months ago

            You’re right, you beat fascism by rooting it out at the source and burning it and salting the ground so it can never take root again. I don’t think those are fascist ideals I think those are just normal moral ones.

              • Xenny@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                5 months ago

                Right now all it means for the everyday citizen is shunning people socially. Letting people anguish in their own decisions. We as a society have decided it’s ok to let people rot in the street for the crime of having no support system. So we ignore and shun and show society those views are not ok. Let fascists rot. It’s the only real thing we can do right now other than take strong political stances and close off routes to fascism politically.

      • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        5 months ago

        then walk back the changes

        When have the Democrats ever shown us that they’ll do that?

        Roe? Voting Rights act? Hell, a Republican had to save ObamaCare.

        Democrats aren’t going to save us from FASCISM. The sooner everyone realizes this, the more prepared we’ll be to fight against it.

          • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            You can vote for Joe Biden while realizing the Democrats won’t save us, I will. We need workers to organize to build an alternative party to Democrats and Republicans. That’s why I don’t shun those that want to vote third party. We’ll never get a third party until we ask for it. The duopoly has us pigeonholed, and we have to break ourselves out, they’re not gonna do it for us.

    • Excrubulent@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      35
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      I honestly don’t know why anyone is strategising as if they’re on the same side as dems or any politician. I’m not even convinced we have a common enemy in Trump, because they don’t seem serious about beating him.

      The question you should ask when voting is “Who is my preferred enemy?” Biden won’t abuse the carte blanche immunity from criminal prosecution? Great, sounds like he’s the weaker enemy, so vote for him. Force him to keep the position he clearly doesn’t want. Force him to disappoint his base for another four years.

      While he’s doing that, get to work building alternatives that meet people’s needs from the bottom up and wean them off of this criminal system, to undermine it and prepare people to thrive as it crumbles.

      The great thing about this political theory of change is that it’s the same regardless of who’s in power. It decouples you from the capricious, disempowering shifts of electoral politics.

    • Kiernian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      they could really tell the IRS to audit 501© and remove their status from the churches and bullshit Republican charities

      That would be juuuuuust about the dumbest thing they could possibly do. It would mobilize gigantic swaths of voters who are heavily invested in rhetoric over fact-checking.

      Doing away with Roe mobilized many of those voters who could be considered to be fence sitters towards the left. Removing church tax exemptions would move them right back and it would do NOTHING to solve the problem, because while the actual big offenders are happily USING the hell out of that tax exemption, they’re rich enough that they’ll get along fine without it.

      It WOULD hurt a whole lot of TINY churches that employ 1-50 people per church and actually do community work, though. All of those would go away. That’s a LOT of rural food shelves.

      I’m largely against the religious tax exemption, but that’s a problem we should worry about AFTER we can replace the nationwide infrastructure we’d be dismantling by doing so with something at least as effective as what’s there now.

      • TheGalacticVoid@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        It also screws over the many churches or other religious organizations that genuinely do good for their communities

        • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          But is he wrong? From Nixon, to Reagan, to Newt GIngrich, to Mitch McConnell to Trump, the Democrats have been feckless and refused to halt this march to fascism. They are complicit by tacit acceptance. This need to adhere to some vague Status Quo (Capitalist Donor Class) is why we are in this situation. It’s time to wake up and realize the Marxists were right all along. You can’t compromise with Capitalism.

          • nova_ad_vitum@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            Yes, he and you are obviously wrong. Even if everything you said was 100 percent true (lol) the people who failed to stop facism are obviously not the same as fascists themselves. Everything thinking person knows this , and Marx would too if he was alive.

            • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              5 months ago

              the people who failed to stop facism are obviously not the same as fascists themselves.

              Superior Orders, or ignorance of what is happening, does not absolve one of responsibility.

              Since the 2020 election cycle began, “fascism” took on a plethora of new meanings, none of which actually accessed the ongoing material conditions surrounding the rise of fascism outside of the Republican Party. In fact, one could easily conclude that “fascists” and “republican” were interchangeable words if they paid close enough attention to the elections. But they are not. The confusion around fascism, weaponized by liberals to drive people to the voting polls, has disallowed any inspection of the primary role the Democratic Party (with its neoliberal, populist, and austerity police state policies) has played by sheltering and coddling this current iteration of fascism. source

              • nova_ad_vitum@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                5 months ago

                Again, that is not the claim that was made. You can’t even stay on topic. I bet Marx could stay on topic .

                • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  Marx abused alcohol, so not sure. The Republicans are capitalists. The Democrats are capitalists. To Marxists they are the same. Liberalism fails because it cannot address the contradictions inherent to capitalism, inequality and wealth accumulation. Capitalism requires inequality for wealth accumulation.

                  Social democratic reforms can alleviate the inequality and distribute the wealth more equitably, but, because it does not replace capitalism itself, it always falters.

                  So, although Democrats and Republicans differ on social policy, they both defer to capitalism. Capitalism rules both parties.

                  • nova_ad_vitum@lemmy.ca
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    5 months ago

                    The Republicans are capitalists. The Democrats are capitalists. To Marxists they are the same.

                    Meaningful, important distinctions can exist even when Marxists are unable to recognize them.

                    Social democratic reforms can alleviate the inequality and distribute the wealth more equitably, but, because it does not replace capitalism itself, it always falters.

                    Explain? Because systems ultimately fail , it’s no good? Longevity and risilience are worthwhile considerations when designing and economic system to govern a civilization, but uktimate fallibility does not invalidate them entirely. More to the point, what evidence is there that Marxists societies do/would last longer?

          • TheGalacticVoid@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            Can’t speak for previously, but recently, a good chunk of Democrats’ failures have been because of a select few members holding out, no?

                  • graphikeye@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    5 months ago

                    there’s always going to be different spoilers within the democratic party because they are created.

                    This is a straight lie. It’s just feelings.

                    A democrat representative from West Virginia represents a completely different electoral base than a democrat from California. So when the House is a slim d majority there are going to be spoilers. Labor reform (and others) has passed many times when Democrats had opportunities. Hassan has a political science degree and knows this. Unfortunately, he is captured by his audience and has to pander to them so he lives in conspiracy land. It’s all feelings and no substance.

        • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          Ah yes not understanding the small cultural differences of minority policies being used to pretend the difference between the sides while on the broader spectrum being the exact same. Not to forget when it comes to foreign affairs all brown people rights go out of the window.

          If both sides weren’t the same the Dems would make an effort to save the things you mentioned above. They’re not doing that.