Also I’m not sure how the “god” (Satan) that wanted humans to have freewill is the bad guy, when “God” for some reason was purposefully trying to keep humans as puppets (or play things) in his little garden. And then had to punish the humans as soon as they could do what they wanted instead of the story laid out for them.

Reminds me a lot of President Business from the Lego movie. He wants everything to be perfect but people keep doing whatever they want to and screwing it up, so he wants to use the “kragle” to “fix” the plan and make everything perfect again.

It was also cheaper 30 years ago to pay everyone involved in that band’s tour, which all comes out of the artist’s pot of money. So a smaller venue means less for artists and the crews supporting them.

So, while doing this now sounds great, that would mean your either continuing to pay a road crew no longer needed for these much smaller tours/venues, or laying these people off (when some of these people will have been part of these crews for the bands touring lifetime).

It still makes me angry that the whole music industry left Pearl Jam out to dry on this. Had even half the artist touring joined in solidarity with Pearl Jam it would probably be a much better market for concert goers these days.

Seems like a fine should be more for being negligent in your donation sources, and so your campaign accepted a donation you shouldn’t have. It should be a whole different category when you are warned multiple times along the way, which sounds like the case here, and then go on to knowingly break campaign finance laws. I think revoking his church’s tax exempt status, if even only temporarily, would serve as more of a deterrent.

Edit - autocorrect is out to get me today =(

Also important to point out the Satanic Temple is not the same as the Church of Satan (or Satanic Church as you’ve labeled it here).

I did find the part that listed the military as one of the Presidents office acts, you are correct on that. I also found this on page 62, that is the basis for the questioning about Seal Team 6 during arguments, and again in the SCOTUS descent. I read it as effectively saying that if the President uses police or military to do an “unlawful killing” then because they are “exempt” he would be immune. So the President isn’t allowed to murder in a foreign country, but if he uses the military it’s an official act and exempt? This reads to me like it only stops the President from personally being a Rambo, carrying out hit jobs, but Trump was a draft dodger (so …). Any lawyers here? I don’t see an instance of the President carrying out an “unlawful” killing without using the police or military. Except if maybe this is one of those things left over from when a President would duel, or people in Congress would bludgeon someone with a cane?

Congress has concurrent authority over many Government functions, and it may sometimes use that authority to regulate the President’s official conduct, including by criminal statute. Article II poses no barrier to prosecution in such cases.

I would thus assess the validity of criminal charges predicated on most official acts—i.e., those falling outside of the President’s core executive power—in two steps. The first question is whether the relevant criminal statute reaches the President’s official conduct. Not every broadly worded statute does. For example, §956 covers conspiracy to murder in a foreign country and does not expressly exclude the President’s decision to, say, order a hostage rescue mission abroad. 18 U. S. C. §956(a). **The underlying murder statute, however, covers only “unlawful” killings. §1111. The Office of Legal Counsel has interpreted that phrase to reflect a public-authority exception for official acts involving the military and law enforcement. **

Trump cares about one thing, Trump. If these policies will hurt people he sees as an enemy, he’ll be all for it. He doesn’t want to run a country, or do any work, he wants to be the “strong man” at the top everyone “respects/fears”. He gives zero shits about anyone or anything besides himself. This election is 100% about getting elected to keep himself out of jail, and of course his revenge on everyone trying to hold him accountable for his ever growing crime list.

He doesn’t want to be a part of it, because that’s like work. He’ll be 100% happy to let them do these horrible things and take credit for it later.

Donald Trump has asked a federal judge to freeze the classified documents case against him in light of a Supreme Court ruling this week that said former presidents have broad immunity from prosecution.

I love that it says former presidents, not presidents in general. I also remember the ruling saying that it was immunity for things that fall within the Presidents “official duties”, of which Roberts gave Trump’s team two examples (pardons and AG/DOJ). I wouldn’t call that “broad immunity”. This very well could be something that Roberts and his co-conspirators had in mind for the “presumptive immunity” type of act though, and the fun part is they didn’t define it so they get to rule if it does/doesn’t, super!

He’s running the country right now, unless you think it’s really Obama and/or the Lizard People.