A consequential moment

Agreed John. This SCOTUS is hell bent on stripping away our rights and weakening the Constitution. This latest immunity decision is going to throw our courts into chaos and jurists needing to determine which action is official and which is unofficial. It is giving a blank check to the president to commit crimes and is an open invitation to tyranny. Normally, citizens might give scant attention to an occupant in the WH with regards to criminality, but Trump has shown a history of squirting the law and using it to benefit himself only. Since he has already said he wants to be a dictator on Day One and use his office for retribution, it puts us all on notice our democracy is in peril and autocracy is steps away. Trump and his immorality should not be allowed to be anywhere near the WH again. The thought that Trump could replace Thomas and Alioto with younger versions of the same and giving an unbalanced SCOTUS for generations should give us all pause.

Mr. Petrovitz - this was before my arrival in the US but I recall that there were elections in 1962 as well. What made you think that citizens could not weigh in? Your age? Did you have parents who voted? Biden has made this world a lot more dangerous than the Cuban crisis that Kennedy resolved with a major diplomatic effort from former President Eisenhower behind the scenes. We don't have that caliber statesman at the top and that Is why you should be concerned. While Trump is far from perfect, he is a better choice to remove the bull Biden from the china shop.

Thanks for your letter, Mr. Petrovitz. That’s why the only logical choice is to vote for Trump to Take America Back. Hat tip to Ray Fowler for his discourse on the left's hysterical screeching (my interpretation).

Good morning, John

I was 9 years old during the aforementioned missile crisis, and I remember it. I don’t think you can compare the SCOTUS ruling released Monday to Nikita poised over a control console with his finger hovering above the launch button.

The Supreme Court decided that a president has substantial immunity for official acts while in office. Siccing Seal Team 6 on political rivals or poisoning surly cabinet members… as Justices Sotomayor and Jackson have hypothesized… would not be official acts. Such actions would not be protected by immunity. Impeachment for high crimes and misdemeanors is still on the books… a procedure most familiar to congressional members of the Democratic Party.

Chief Justice Roberts responded to Justices Sotomayor and Jackson. He said, "As for the dissents, they strike a tone of chilling doom that is wholly disproportionate to what the Court actually does today…," and added, "Coming up short on reasoning, the dissents repeatedly level variations of the accusation that the Court has rendered the President ‘above the law.’"

The Chief Justice was not finished. He described the dissent in this way, their "positions in the end boil down to ignoring the Constitution’s separation of powers and the Court’s precedent and instead fear mongering on the basis of extreme hypotheticals about a future where the President ‘feels empowered to violate federal criminal law.'"

What’s really going on? After last Thursday’s debate, the DNC is on its heels… so it’s back to the playbook. Distraction. Democratic Party congressional leaders are calling for Congress to address the immunity decision with a Constitutional amendment, and others are calling for impeachment of SCOTUS justices. The fear mongering extreme hypotheticals from Sotomayor and Jackson, described by Chief Justice Roberts, appear to be part of the distraction.

Everyone can crawl out from under their desks… we are not staring down nuclear oblivion as a result of Monday’s immunity decision. But where is the sense of alarm that our president is in the Oval Office only six hours a day and cannot deliver meaningful statements in public without the use of a teleprompter?