Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

maxrandb

(17,423 posts)
19. Different "reality" check
Mon Jul 1, 2024, 01:57 PM
Jul 2024

This country survived 240 years of Presidents from numerous parties, with diverse ideologies, without having to adjudicate that no one is above the law, and that the president was subject to the same laws that my plumber is.

This standard was so implicit in the documents, debates, doctrines and laws that formed our country, that it was like the act of breathing. You didn't need to plan to breath, you just did it. No man was above the law, because, of course, no man is above the law.

Despite all the "nuanced" arguments and legalistic language being thrown around, the vast majority of Americans just witnessed another 6-3 court decision, split along partisan lines where the OBVIOUS benefit of said decision serves ONE PARTISAN INTEREST.

Excuse me, but the "reality" of this travesty needs no checking.

The presidency is significantly "different" today than it was yesterday. That's reality.

The relationship between the presidency and the people, is significantly "different" today than it was yesterday. That's reality.

The standards under which a president has been expected to conduct themselves is significantly different today than it was yesterday. That's reality.

And that "new" reality is for all future presidents. Hard to imagine, but there may even be someone more morally bankrupt than Donnie Dipshit that could ascend to our highest office. That's reality.

In the Navy we used to say; "don't blow smoke up my ass and tell me it's a sea breeze"

Recommendations

2 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

So, you disagree with the 3 "liberal" justices? intrepidity Jul 2024 #1
He's just here to lay some truth on us plebs BannonsLiver Jul 2024 #8
Op made a reasonable point PatSeg Jul 2024 #11
Start a fan club then. BannonsLiver Jul 2024 #12
No thanks PatSeg Jul 2024 #15
I'm in n/t Polybius Jul 2024 #20
Except the dissenting opinion criticizes the actual decision intrepidity Jul 2024 #14
Understandable PatSeg Jul 2024 #16
In broad terms, I agree, however Fiendish Thingy Jul 2024 #2
+1 dalton99a Jul 2024 #9
Bullshit. Think. Again. Jul 2024 #3
there is another possibility rampartc Jul 2024 #4
Yes, but Trump hasn't "broken the law"..... brooklynite Jul 2024 #6
Nonsense Goodheart Jul 2024 #5
Question SARose Jul 2024 #7
Basically agree. We tend to -- and I guess have to -- look at things in the context of does it help/hurt trump. Silent Type Jul 2024 #10
So, it is remanded back to Judge Chutkan and the Appeals Court? kentuck Jul 2024 #13
"This is a devastating blow to our system of government." LetMyPeopleVote Jul 2024 #17
More from the dissent ScratchCat Jul 2024 #18
Different "reality" check maxrandb Jul 2024 #19
Thank you for cutting through the focus-group-speak bullshit. harumph Jul 2024 #22
So, OPEN and SHUT ruling? bluestarone Jul 2024 #21
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Reality check: this was t...»Reply #19