Betrayal bySCOTUS justices.

Voting 6-3, the US Supreme Court ruled that Donald Trump has some immunity from criminal charges for trying to reverse the 2020 election results, all but ensuring that a trial won’t happen before the November election.


Basically, The SCOTUS ruled former presidents retain significant immunity from prosecution for acts taken while in office. Of course, this ruling complicates efforts to prosecute Donald Trump.


Realistically, I'm pretty certain he will not go to trial on the pending criminal charges he is facing before the 2024 election, and perhaps not at all. His SCOTUS appointees are definitely rewarding him for criminal behavior, in my view.


If elected President for a second term, I'm certain he will feel free to continue to evade the rule of law, as he managed to do in his first term. So the best hope the American people have is to use the power of the vote to make sure he is not elected President a second time.


Unfortunately, I'm beginning to understand, firsthand, how the people of Germany who still had respect for the rule of law must have felt to see it all slipping away. The parallels between the 1930s in Germany and present-day United States are quite similar when it comes to a breakdown of the rule of law. When we have a United States Senate who refused to convict Donald Trump during impeachment proceedings, and some members of the house of Representatives who openly wanted to overturn lawful election results, and now a SCOTUS deciding the President has certain immunity from prosecution for his conduct. Let's please not forget this man, Donald J. Trump, has been convicted of 34 felonies, by a jury of his peers, in a Court of law. Yet, the Republican party is still poised to choose him as their candidate for another term as President of the United States, even though he is a lawfully convicted criminal, and has other criminal trials pending. So, unless Republican voters choose not to vote for him, it's quite possible, for the first time in our history, we could have a convicted criminal serving as President of the United States. Are Trump supporters so lost, they're willing to elect a convicted criminal? Perhaps so. It's up to Democrats and Independents to put a stop to this while it can still be stopped, while the people still have the power to vote and stop it.

Popular posts from this blog

Religiosity and strict boundaries concerning friendship.

Yesterday, I posted, on social media, about how I am reluctant to share with a friend of nearly five decades that I no longer identify as an evangelical Christian and have embraced Quakerism. The comments I received, in response to this, were mostly along the lines of ... if it were a true friendship, it wouldn't matter. On the surface, I agree with that statement, but it's a simplistic response, in my view. So, I wanted to delve more into this in a forum where I wasn't limited to a few sentences, and decided to address it here. I think I can illustrate this best in a life experience I had several years ago. A mother and her daughter and I worked in the same place. I liked them both, immediately, and as the years went by, we shared more of our personal lives, as one does when you get to know and trust one another. These women were also very nice to my life partner, and sought him out quite often when he came to pick me up from work, or joined me there on my lunch break. He
Read more

We either have separation of church and state or we don't.

One of many principles that baffles me about Christians who are also politically conservative is their unabashed effort to try and make the United States into what they term a "Christian nation." This desire is baffling to me since the reason the colonies were founded was to allow for freedom of religion, supposedly, the freedom to worship as one chooses, along with the right to not worship if one chooses, and the freedom of no state religion. The United States founding fathers were so concerned about this, that they incorporated this principle into the United States Constitution as a 1st Amendment guarantee. The First Amendment to the United States Constitution states: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." This amendment was adopted
Read more

The party of gopers and gropers!

Senate Republicans block bill to protect Americans' access to contraception. These GOPERS are on a roll, don't ya know? In my opinion, they really want to throw women back into the 19th century, or even further back than that, if possible. The Senate vote on the Right To Contraception Act was 51-39, falling short of the 60 votes needed to defeat a filibuster. Republicans said the bill is unnecessary as the use of birth control is already protected under Supreme Court precedent. I believe this to be a lie. Many felt the right to abortion was also protected by SCOTUS precedent, and we all know what happened there, and what has happened in many red states, due to overzealous actions of Republican controlled state Legislatures seeking to control a woman's right to choose, and also allowing insurance companies to decline to pay for contraceptives. People who fail to see this trend in red states, I feel, are complicit in this effort, and should quickly turn their consciences back
Read more