Posted on 06/18/2024 9:05:53 AM PDT by Dead Corpse
https://greatawakening.win/p/17tL6JzByu/anyone-have-sauce-on-any-new-fen/c/
https://www.tigerdroppings.com/rant/politics/fencing-being-put-up-around-the-supreme-court-as-we-speak/113788763/
https://www.timesnownews.com/world/us/us-news/us-supreme-court-fenced-for-first-time-since-roe-v-wade-ruling-videos-surface-article-111070890
Heard about this on one of my gun forums and went looking for better sources. Appears that with the end of the term coming up and with at least 2 seriously high profile cases being published this Thursday/Friday... It looks like the barriers are going back up.
My guess, the Trump Immunity case is going to upset some folks.
Stay frosty kids... This week could get spicy.
I hope this article is correct.
https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/01/supreme-court-likely-to-discard-chevron/
Interesting point on that last issue...Using some legal jiujitsu to avoid having to make a larger decision.
We’ll know by the end of the week I guess.
As to the fencing... What wasn’t there, is now there, but isn’t much, and there’s still two days to go...
Thanks to everyone helping to try to get good info on this. It’s hard to trust sources out there.
Ok... can we verify when this was taken? Not posted, taken.
Some folks on X and elsewhere are re-hashing photos from last years Roe decision.
P6 has a knack to report things in a timed way to maximize the cabal's narrative. 'NancyDrew' is the DC Patriot to follow on these matters, aka Helen Brady. On youtube and telegram.
The fencing is there.
More accurately, how we got to Watergate:
https://the-avocado.org/2019/06/08/how-we-got-here-the-education-of-tom-charles-huston/
Yep. Heard about this yesterday. We all know exactly why the fences are going up. Its not about the Chevron Doctrine. I fully expect that to be overturned but the DC Swamp creatures would be unlikely to riot over that even though they’ll hate it. The same goes for the case about the feds leaning on social media to censor speech they don’t like. Its probably not even for the laughable Jan 6 claim against Trump under the 14th amendment. No.
We all know its for Trump vs United States. The SCOTUS will have no choice but to rule that a president must first be impeached for any official acts before every local prosecutor....and the US has 30,000 DAs....can prosecute him. Meaning the laughable NY case will be thrown out completely. Klantifa types will go ape feces over that. Talking heads on the Leftist propaganda outlets will lose their chit right on the air.
Fb live ❤️
6/17/24
12:45 pm
Waist high fencing has been installed all the way around the SC building. I was told it was for some decisions that are about to come down.
So... that tall fencing photo is from last year? Or no?
I do not have telegram, my apologies.
If they’re fencing, clearly is a decision that leans right. They wouldn’t be doing it if it was lefty ruling.
So the protective fencing is off that they had up during roe v wade?
That is what I am trying to verify... The only fencing we’ve really been able to verify is the lower “bike rack” looking fences that wouldn’t stop a determined cow much less anyone angry.
I do not recall the specifics of the roe fencing. Clearly, so far, whatever is around SCOTUS today is waist-high minimal security. Perhaps in the front of the building it is beefier fencing, perhaps a bit higher than waist-high.
If the court was going to uphold Chevron, no one would be talking about Chevron.
Odd shades of the opening verse of Pirkei Avot:
Moses received the Torah at Sinai and transmitted it to Joshua, Joshua to the elders, and the elders to the prophets, and the prophets to the Men of the Great Assembly. They said three things: Be patient in [the administration of] justice, raise many disciples and make a fence round the Torah [וַ*עֲשׂוּ* סְיָג לַתּוֹרָה].
There's a lot to follow around over in Klein's:
סְיָג m.n. PBH hedge, fence. [From סוג ᴵᴵ (= to fence in).]
As per "סג",
:דהיינו
Sag-ס״ג-63 (יו״ד ה״י וא״ו ה״י) is filled with Yods (י) except for the Aleph-א in the Vav-וא״ו. This indicates that it is mostly kindness with a portion of mercy. It therefore represents Binah. The Aleph-א appears in the Vav-וא״ו of Sag-ס״ג-63 because the Vav (ו), as well, represents the quality of mercy.https://www.sefaria.org/The_Beginning_of_Wisdom.3.13?lang=bi
Re: 2 - LOL - not likely.
I watch both Nancy Drew and Penguin 6. I think those pictures with the high fence are from the time of the Roe v Wade reversal.
The outcome of the Alvin Bragg case likely changed some minds on the court. The real threat to democracy is a president who has to fear malicious prosecutions in state courts or from a politicized DoJ not a presidential extrajudicial execution which we have already seen during the Obama administration which the DoJ said is A OK.
My guess is the court will say a president cannot be indicted and tried until he has first been impeached. That was in my opinion clearly the intent of the framers. That would neatly kill all this lawfare. Anything that tries to distinguish between official and personal actions is hopelessly complicated because all too often a presidents personal interests and official duties are hopelessly intertwined. For instance if a president believes fraud influenced an election he has both a duty to try and do something about it and a personal stake in the outcome if he was the candidate impacted. How do you separate the two motivations and why should it matter?
The quality of legal counsel coming from woke colleges the last 25 -40 years is having an effect on the decision making of the democrats. Of course their pursuit of Trump is destroying institutions and laws. But it is a feature. They never plan to turn over power going forward.
However, should the democrats lose this time, all that exploratory legal theory and lawfare will be used against them here in the US.
The real problem is not inside the USA, though... it is the shortsightness in advancing US foreign policy through corruption, LGBT, destruction of the International Monetary System to steal Russia’s money all the while protecting funds frozen from Iran for 40 years.... The United States has destroyed our own standing in the world order. We cannot be trused. Our International System of Laws is built on sand, and fake fiat. No one wants the USD.
Brics is growing and at some point it will beocme the basis for the replacement organization for the United Nations. The US and EU are going to on their own, with 2/3s of the world’s population seeking stability without the wars of the West.
You must have never heard of United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683 (1974), in which the Supreme Court held that the President does not have "an absolute, unqualified Presidential privilege of immunity from judicial process under all circumstances." In that case, the issue was merely whether the President can ignore all judicial subpoenas. The Supreme Court found that "Absent a claim of need to protect military, diplomatic, or sensitive national security secrets, the confidentiality of Presidential communications is not significantly diminished by producing material for a criminal trial under the protected conditions of in camera inspection ..."
A few years later, in Nixon v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 731 (1982), the Supreme Court held that "a former President of the United States is entitled to absolute immunity from damage claims predicated on his official acts" and that this "absolute Presidential immunity from damages liability" extends to all official acts, even those within the "outer perimeter" of his official responsibility.
More recently, in Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681 (1997), the Supreme Court recognized that while the President has absolute immunity from damages claims arising out of official acts extending to the "outer perimeter of his authority" (citing Nixon v. Fitzgerald), that immunity does not extend to claims arising prior to the President being elected; however, "With respect to acts taken in his 'public character' - that is, official acts - the President may be disciplined principally by impeachment, not by private lawsuits for damages."
So it is settled law that a President has absolute immunity from damages claims arising out of official acts extending to the outer perimeter of his authority, but does not have absolute immunity for purely private actions, taken before or after office or, presumably, during office if they have nothing to do with his official duties (e.g., Clinton could have been prosecuted or sued for sexually assaulting Kathleen Willey in the oval office).
The only open issue in Trump's case is whether the President's absolute immunity extends to criminal prosecution arising out of official acts "extending to the outer perimeter of his authority," or whether the President's absolute immunity is limited to civil claims for damages. My bet is that the Supremes will recognize Presidential immunity from criminal prosecutions arising out of official acts, or local district attorneys in both Democrat and Republican controlled districts will be constantly indicting and prosecuting Presidents and former Presidents of the opposite party, using the templates created by the Democrats trying to prevent Trump from being re-elected. OTOH, I think Roberts will try to make the opinion as narrow as possible, to avoid a 5/4 or 6/3 decision.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.