'Profoundly ahistorical': 4-star generals side with Jack Smith, tell Supreme Court Trump's immunity claims are 'assault'

[malaise]

Was discussed on Deadline WH


https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/profoundly-ahistorical-4-star-generals-side-with-jack-smith-tell-supreme-court-trumps-immunity-claims-are-assault-on-democracy/

A distinguished group of retired four-star generals and admirals from the U.S. military have argued in a brief filed in the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday that Donald Trump’s claims of absolute “presidential immunity” from criminal prosecution tied to Jan. 6 is an “assault” on the “foundational commitments” underpinning democracy and if his argument is allowed to succeed before them later this month, it threatens “to subvert the careful balance between the executive and legislative branches struck in the Constitution.”

The 38-page amicus brief features 19 authors, all of them decorated retired admirals, generals or secretaries from branches of the U.S. Army, Navy and Air Force respectively. On April 25, the high court is poised to hear Trump’s question of immunity against prosecution for his alleged criminal conspiracy to subvert the results of the 2020 election. and according to the brief, these are arguments that should be approached with extreme caution.

“Petitioner’s theory of presidential immunity threatens to subvert the careful balance between the executive and legislative branches struck in the Constitution. For example, if emboldened by absolute immunity, the President might unsuccessfully seek authorization from Congress to undertake a certain action and then attempt to have the military carry out that action even though Congress rejected it. Moreover, our Constitution directs the people’s elected representatives in Congress to enact criminal laws that the executive is tasked with enforcing; allowing the President to violate those laws with impunity fundamentally distorts this constitutional allocation of powers,” they wrote.
————-
This is HUGE!

[onecaliberal]

1. Recommend BIGLY.

[triron]

28. Ditto

[hueymahl]

43. Mega Dittos!

[Alice Kramden]

2. K&R n/t

[stage left]

3. K&R nt.

[Leith]

4. I just hope

that the soops aren't too corrupt to listen to the military.

[soldierant]

40. I hope so too.

They don't listen to doctors on women''s health. This is one situationwhere I am hoing, just for the sake of rhe country,that these men have more clout than women. (Of course I mean the Generals - though some of them are undoubtedly not men - I cdon't mean the women on the COurt. I want them to have clpout always.)

[madinmaryland]

5. The extreme six do not care. It's about protecting the trump party for them.

[Hekate]

6. KnR

[AllaN01Bear]

7. ""

[Brother Buzz]

8. It's sad this brain trust was compelled to write the amicus brief on the first place

[malaise]

9. True

But glad they did

[jaxexpat]

65. If the USSC goes down the stupid path they've been offered, "sad" won't cover what remains of the nation.

It is an outrage that such an irresponsible concept as "total executive immunity" (in any iteration of subject of coverage) is even entertained by anyone, but especially those on the USSC. Those justices who vote to legitimize such a position have signed their own notice of impeachment and an eternal curse from mankind's bleak future. Those that consciously support such a proposition simply want to dissolve the government and establish a dictatorship.

There's no middle ground here. Should this idea stand, the supreme court and the congress will be powerless and pointless except to pull the scab off human rights, breed unrest onto the streets where terror patrols everyone's door and rubber-stamp brutal lawlessness from the executive and military. All one needs to do is look onto Central and South America's social and economic horror shows to peruse the future, the template, of such a decision on the US. There is no place in hell black enough to hide those who support this retreat into madness nor any appropriate response except universal and perpetual condemnation and resistance.

[canetoad]

10. Hugh!!!1

Indeed.

[malaise]

11. Hey you - long time no see 😀

[canetoad]

12. Been reading more than writing

Garden work - getting reading for winter etc. Hours walking on the beach much to my dog's delight.

Hope everything is fine with you - I'm envying your weather as it cools down here.

[malaise]

16. I'll envy yours as mine heats up

Enjoy the walks😀

[Permanut]

13. This veteran salutes the nineteen.

[ejbr]

14. Supreme Court

won't care. They're filthy

[Orrex]

15. This would be encouraging if Trumps' SCOTUS cared about precedent or the law

Considering that they see themselves as infallible and above reproach, it's hard to imagine that anything so flimsy as a formal petition by dozens of experts would inspire to change the decisions that they've no doubt already made.

[aggiesal]

17. I'm betting that decorated retired admirals, generals or secretaries from branches of the

U.S. Army, Navy and Air Force respectively, will submit an amicus brief to SCOTUS, in favor of Pendejo45.

They'll have to neutralize this first letter.

[panfluteman]

18. I Never Thought I'd Live to See the Day:

Distinguished retired military generals schooling the Supreme Court on the Constitution!

[malaise]

20. THIS

Indeed - give thanks

[Goodheart]

44. It was an act of corruption for the Supreme Court to take up this case.

[mobeau69]

56. ⬆️ BINGO!

Nailed it!

[Bundbuster]

19. Good for the 19 Patriots (and post of the day, Malaise)

but sad that it had to come to this. I wonder if Slobby's Satanic Six would even be swayed by an amicus brief from God.

[brakester]

66. But, isn't trumpie.....

.....god????

[GreenWave]

21. It should never have gotten to SCROTUS.

Those fuckers are slow walking first grade bully shit.

[Ohio Joe]

22. K&R - nt

[TBF]

23. Unfortunately the Roberts Court is only concerned about ushering in Christian Nationalism -

they'll do whatever Trump wants them to do.

[cstanleytech]

24. It's simple, Trump violated the Constitution by trying to overthrow the governmand and that voided his immunity.

[malaise]

25. He isn't immune

PERIOD

[cstanleytech]

26. Oh, a President has some but it's very limited as the Republicans taught us with President Clinton.

[PatrickforB]

27. This is very good news. Thank you for posting!

Let's hope their combined gravitas will keep the right-wing majority at bay. If they grant Trumpy immunity then we are all fucked.

[malaise]

30. Agree

[struggle4progress]

29. Speak of the devil and his stench wafts by

I wonder if that pestilent odor would abate if Donnie just drank more bleach

[malaise]

31. I wish he'd croak

That is alll

[bdamomma]

35. Me too

malaise

[struggle4progress]

41. I'd be glad for some time where he was safe behind bars or in a padded room

[Kablooie]

32. So SCOTUS doesnt know this?

Its like SCOTUS thinks Trump knows more anout the constitution than they do.

[Irish_Dem]

55. No they don't. Military generals have to explain the law to them.

[Dave in VA]

33. In memory of my father and father-in-law

who were WWII Navy and Army veterans, thank you.

[malaise]

37. Jen Psaki discussing now with one of them Louis Caldera

Down goes Slobby

That was excellent

[gab13by13]

57. That interview by Jen

may have been the best interview I have watched in months. Caldera explained about how the military is going to have to decide whether an order that comes from Trump is a lawful order that doesn't violate the Constitution. He said that giving Trump immunity will destroy our military that is based on the civilian and military personnel working together on the same page.

I wish that someone would replay his segment from Jen Psaki's show, it was riveting.

[malaise]

59. Video

[Shipwack]

34. Huh... they're years too late...

For example, if emboldened by absolute immunity, the President might unsuccessfully seek authorization from Congress to undertake a certain action and then attempt to have the military carry out that action even though Congress rejected it.

It would have been nice if someone had thought of this before....

Trump and the current Republican party are what happens when you vow to "look forward, not backward"... Of course, this theory of ignoring right wing abuse of power goes back to Nixon, at least...

[Passages]

36. My hero, Jack Smith.

A relief they agree with Smith.

[malaise]

38. Love him

Welcome to DU

[Passages]

39. Very kind of you. Thank you, malaise.

[Roy Rolling]

42. Huge

Let the war of amicus briefs commence.
We’re gonna see who represents the “best and brightest”.
The smart money’s against the Slobfather’s lawyers. ETTD.

[LiberaBlueDem]

45. President can be impeached

SCOTUS needs to only be reminded of that to tell them there is no immunity

[usonian]

46. Jack Smith filed a brief with that and a lot more.

Actually, the pdf linked in the post makes interesting reading.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100218846934

[BaronChocula]

47. Now THAT is duty and honor

This makes me think of the problem I've had with the famous naval officer Stephan Decatur and his famous quote "My country, right or wrong." It made me think that morality was not the guiding light of decisions from military brass. These generals stepping up to weigh in on the lack of standing of a presidential candidate is monumental. At the same time it points out the degree of crisis we're in. Oy!

[burrowowl]

63. The rest of the quote

But when wrong to be made right.

[mnmoderatedem]

48. I always wonder if the dumbass MAGATs ever stop to realize

that the presidential immunity they keep insisting on would apply to Biden and other democratic presidents as well.

[Hekate]

49. I hope this will be this generation's Major General Smedley Butler moment.

In his time, he blew the whistle and saved us from a fascist takeover. (The Business Plot, 1933)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smedley_Butler
In 1933, he became involved in a controversy known as the Business Plot, when he told a congressional committee that a group of wealthy industrialists were planning a military coup to overthrow President Franklin D. Roosevelt, with Butler selected to lead a march of veterans to become dictator, similar to fascist regimes at that time. The individuals involved all denied the existence of a plot, which included the father of George H. W. Bush, Prescott Bush, and the media ridiculed the allegations, but a final report by a special House of Representatives Committee confirmed some of Butler's testimony.

[malaise]

53. THIS

Rec

[malthaussen]

74. That's a little different from filing an amicus brief...

... what I find curious about that whole plot is that absolutely nothing was done to any of the alleged conspirators, even though the investigating committee verified most of Butler's statements.

Problem is, Smedley Butler already had a reputation as something of a loose cannon among military professionals. His politics leaned Left (he even voted for a Socialist candidate for President), and he was soon to write his scathing expose, War is a Racket, which had to step on a number of very important toes, since it presented the facts about American imperialism, especially in Central America and the Caribbean. He'd already been rejected for Commandant of the Corps for "unreliability" and retired from active duty. Which makes it very strange to me, anyway, that the conspirators would have thought to tap him for military leader of their Right coup. A more inappropriate candidate I can scarce imagine, but maybe Prescott Bush and his ilk were as tone-deaf as their descendants would be.

Anyway, Butler was presented with an offer to help overthrow the US government, and instead blew the whistle on the alleged conspirators, even if it went nowhere. That takes a considerable amount of courage (but Butler didn't lack that commodity). Signing an amicus brief to the USSC as a retired flag officer risks nothing at all. So I think the two actions are not comparable.

-- Mal

[czarjak]

50. When your Chief Justice declares,

"Racism is dead.", he means to him.

[malaise]

54. Agree

On,y white people matter to him

[Hekate]

61. Only half of white people, at that

[Takket]

51. They are correct. And this is pretty basic first year of law school stuff

Heck I wouldn’t even say law school. Any high school course in civics should have told you at least this much about the separation of powers. It is a disgrace and embarrassment to the name of law that such an absurd notion has successfully been used to delay his trials all the way to SCOTUS.

[bucolic_frolic]

52. Patriotism, logic, the Constitution vs. SCOTUS-6 Federalists

I don't see much reason for hope.

[spanone]

58. K&R

[malaise]

60. Caldera was excellent

[lark]

62. Do the Christofacist 6 give even one small damn about this - no.

They have already decided to shield their sick fuck so that he can protect himself and the rich like them because he lets them do as they please and doesn't give a damn about any laws - same as them.

[ProudMNDemocrat]

64. So well stated by those who served this Nation in Uniform...

Who swore an oath to uphold and defend the US Constitution and this Nation against enemies Foreign and Domestic, so help them God.

Any Supreme Court Justice who decides that these former 4 Star Generals and Admirals are NOT worthy of the positions they hold. They will have betrayed the very Constitution they swore to uphold and defend by saying that TSF is ABOVE THE LAW if they Grant him "absolute immunity."from prosecution once leaving office for crimes committed while in office as TSF has.

We will have to wait and see.

[H2O Man]

67. Recommended (# 270!)

I will read this closer when I get back from the grocery store. I had wondered if all of human life would end with the eclipse, and so I am about out of food. Kind of disappointing, I suppose. But at least I hadn't made any bets, knowing I couldn't collect if I had won.

[malaise]

70. 😂😂😂 for the end of the world

Nice to see Smedley Butlers still exist

[malthaussen]

73. With respect, I don't think a Smedley Butler comparison is apt...

... Gen Butler was presented with an offer to abandon his oath and principles and assist in an overthrow of the US government. He refused and blew the whistle on the conspirators (to whom, it seems, about nothing was done). That is a bit different from a bunch of retired flag officers putting their names to an amicus brief to remind the USSC of their duties.

-- Mal

[malaise]

75. Valid point

Rec

[malthaussen]

72. LOL, you should always hedge your bets, H2O Man!

I hope you had enough TP at least.

-- Mal

[republianmushroom]

68. Thank you, Generals.

[Evolve Dammit]

69. I wonder if they all will read it??

[malthaussen]

71. I've heard of "mansplaining," but now I know of "generalsplaining."

Thing is, I am damned sure the justices of the USSC, every one of them, know exactly what DJT and the GOP are trying to do. What I am not damned sure of is that enough of them don't support it to stop it.

Rationally, one would think that the justices are aware that granting Mr Trump immunity for his multitude of crimes against the people of the USA will be to their own detriment, but one thing seems clear about DJT and the GOP: rationality does not apply. All sober analysts (and even a few drunk ones) agree that it is not in the interests of the Court to further indulge this madman. I've heard that a person can always be counted on to act in his own best interests. This may be true, but it doesn't acknowledge that other people may calculate their best interests differently from the way I would.

Anyway, the generals are lecturing the Court on what they already are fully aware of. If that's not "mansplaining," I don't know what is.

-- Mal