• Daft_ish@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      He’ll talk out both sides of his mouth. He will say the president doesn’t have absolute immunity but be the first in line to sign legislation that says just that.

    • Alteon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 months ago

      Seriously, if he thinks this makes him look any better for all the shit he put us through, he better fucking think again.

      He is a big reason as to why everything is so bad. He enabled all of this. This is his legacy.

  • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    7 months ago

    They needed to press him in a different way:

    "During the Trump impeachment, you said that he could still be held accountable in a court of law, his lawyers are trying to argue that only stands if he were impeached and convicted first.

    If the Supreme Court validates that opinion, would you change your mind and vote to convict?"

    • AbidanYre@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      7 months ago

      That wouldn’t really matter. He’ll do and say whatever suits him politically at the moment.

      Like when he held up Garland’s Supreme Court nomination for a year and then jammed Barrett through while ballots were being collected.

  • Wrench@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    7 months ago

    Uh huh. Just like you were outraged at the audacity of a violent mob threatening democracy itself the day it happened, and then you covered for Trump and blocked his impeachment days later.

    Go fuck yourself, mitch.

  • DandomRude@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    7 months ago

    I don’t understand what there is to discuss here at all. If the US president had immunity as a matter of principle, he wouldn’t be a president, he’d be some kind of god-king (even kings couldn’t do whatever they wanted).

      • Asafum@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        7 months ago

        From what I understand it’s just another way he’s making a mockery of the justice system. He’s making these absurd claims so he can have new cases come up and delay delay delay delay. Once he becomes president he can then have his DOJ dog wipe it all away.

      • DandomRude@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        7 months ago

        Well, I’m not very familiar with the US Constitution. But if there really is any leeway for such advances, it doesn’t seem to me to be a good constitution for a democratic country.

      • Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        The conservatives agree… For conservative presidents only, of course.

        There ia no such thing as a “good conservative”. Each one is a cancer cell in the global disease that kills and oppresses normal people.

  • Carrolade@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    7 months ago

    Actually, as a leading legislator in charge of creating our laws, it very much should be your job to decide this principle for future cases. I understand if you want to leave it to the next generation, though. You’ve done enough, Mitch.

  • njm1314@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    7 months ago

    Frankly if you don’t break with him on this you’re literally a traitor to this country. There’s no other way to interpret this.

    • Crashumbc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      7 months ago

      It’s worse than that. The ONLY reason the GOP is breaking on this is to preserve their ability to attack Democrat Presidents.

      There’s nothing “noble” going on here

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

      It’s important to note that the inverse isn’t necessarily true, and in fact McConnell is a counterexample: despite the fact that he did break with Trump on this, he’s still literally a traitor to this country anyway.

  • xmunk
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    7 months ago

    Mitch McConnell will reliably hold this position until a Republican is back in office - just like his objections over lame duck Supreme Court appointments and everything fucking else. How many times is the media going to fall for his bullshit.

  • deft@lemmy.wtf
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    7 months ago

    Whatever he says I don’t care. I hope he has the worst day ever everyday

  • don@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    7 months ago

    How many times did he factory reset before he got his full statement out in one go?