News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Supreme Court rules ex-presidents have immunity for offic... by coffeemug on Monday July 01, 2024 @02:05PM (#40848500)
Yes. Ever since Bill Clinton (and probably before that, I was too young) the President and a non-trivial number of presidential candidates were either under an investigation of some sort, or a threat of such an investigation. Obviously Bill, Hillary, constant threats of investigation of George W Bush and Obama, special counsel investigating Biden, and all the Trump cases. Notably nothing ever comes out of these.

This is ridiculous! It's blatantly political and both parties are guilty of this. The justice system is meant to hold people accountable for breaking the law, not as an additional political mechanism for checks and balances. I haven't looked into the case and don't know the legal precedent SCOTUS used for this decision, but from a consequentialist standpoint this seems to me an obviously good outcome.

Re:Supreme Court rules ex-presidents have immunity for offic... by jauntywundrkind on Monday July 01, 2024 @02:30PM (#40848818)
Yeah but the Republicans keep doing war crimes & the Democrats... Got a blow job? Passed Romneycare/Obamacare? One of these sets of prosecution is not like the others.
Re:Supreme Court rules ex-presidents have immunity for offic... by mywittyname on Monday July 01, 2024 @05:09PM (#40850724)
Clinton was charged with lying under oath, obstruction of justice, and abuse of power. The first and second charges were approved while the third was rejected. He was only found guilty of the obstruction charge.

The behavior of Ken Starr in this case was abhorrent. In my eyes, there was a degree of witness intimidation going on in this case.

Ironically, this SCOTUS ruling would have blocked Clinton's impeachment because Ken Starr was an Independent Counsel, which SCOTUS ruled cannot be used in such matters.

Re:Supreme Court rules ex-presidents have immunity for offic... by mrguyorama on Tuesday July 02, 2024 @11:24AM (#40857570)
>Clinton was charged with lying under oath, obstruction of justice, and abuse of power.

Which were none of the things he was initially accused of or investigated for. Ain't that funny

Re:Supreme Court rules ex-presidents have immunity for offic... by ImJamal on Monday July 01, 2024 @05:32PM (#40850965)
Are you seriously suggesting that Democrats don't commit war crimes?

You should probably look up Obama's track record on this. Killing Americans without due process, torture, killing civilians, etc. Not to mention other crimes like the massive amount of spying on Americans. Don't forget Snowden revealed all his stuff during Obama's reign and those crimes were still ongoing.

Re:Supreme Court rules ex-presidents have immunity for offic... by electrondood on Monday July 01, 2024 @06:28PM (#40851510)
See, the difference is politically-motivated investigations YIELD NO CRIMES WHEN NO CRIME WAS COMMITTED.

Today's ruling is a solution to a problem that no one has actually had for the last 250 years, and which no one currently has.