First, the conviction of Donald Trump on 34 felony counts doesn't seem to have reassured Democrats and the media (same thing, we know) that Joe Biden is a lock in 2024. They're still pondering the ramifications of a Donald Trump victory in November.
Second, we're tired of hearing about "separation of powers" and "abuses" when Biden brags openly about defying the Supreme Court's ruling on transferring billions of student loan debt to the taxpayers. "When the Supreme Court told me I couldn't, I found two other ways to do it," he told graduates at Morehouse College. So much for checks and balances.
Peter Baker, chief White House correspondent for the New York Times, is pondering a hypothetical. What would it mean to have an outlaw president? Like, "what institutional deterrents could discourage abuses" if a president believes he's above the law?
What would it mean to have a criminal president? If Trump wins, he will have survived two impeachments, four indictments, civil judgments for sexual abuse and fraud and a felony conviction. Given that, it's hard to imagine what institutional deterrents could discourage abuses.…
— Peter Baker (@peterbakernyt) June 2, 2024
Austere legal scholar and MSNBC contributor Joyce Vance fears for the separation of powers (mentioned above).
If Trump is reelected, there will be no one left to tell him no. So much for all the rhetoric about three branches of government & separation of powers. https://t.co/SeYCtcZRry
— Joyce Alene (@JoyceWhiteVance) June 2, 2024
Liberals went insane when they accused Texas Gov. Greg Abbott of defying the Supreme Court by continuing to put up razor wire, but that's not what the Supreme Court ruled at all. So where's the outrage over Biden defying the Supreme Court? Who's left to tell him no?
Recommended
Biden brags all the time about the Supreme Court telling him no on student loan debt "forgiveness" and how he's ignored them.
— AdamInHTownTX (Not a Neurologist) (@AdamInHTownTX) June 3, 2024
So much for all the rhetoric about three branches of government & separation of powers.
Hope you live in fear.
— JWF (@JammieWF) June 3, 2024
Thanks for this. You just made me want to vote for him harder.
— Truth Ninja (@TruthNinja316) June 3, 2024
And the payback against you leftists would be GLORIOUS
— Stacy (@BoyMomStacy) June 3, 2024
Wait.... Do you mean we still actually have three branches of government and separation of powers left? Interesting.
— Truthmattersla (@truthmattersla) June 3, 2024
Gee! If only we had a precedent we could look at to see how Trump would act as president. 🙄
— Clinton De Young (@WriterDeYoung) June 3, 2024
If I thought for a moment he would actually do that, nothing would keep me from voting for him.
— Lady Hecate ⚫️ (@hecate40) June 3, 2024
“I have to jail my political opponent or nothing will stop him” is a chain of logic which will inevitably extend to you and your family https://t.co/XfCo6Qw3Qg
— Auron MacIntyre (@AuronMacintyre) June 3, 2024
He is going to win, and when he does, we are coming for every last one of you. https://t.co/AV2fWbqvST
— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) June 3, 2024
But back to Baker's question, what would America be like under a criminal president?
Peter Baker, two weeks ago. https://t.co/P4cgrVKXJ6 pic.twitter.com/q2xEiBpa8c
— Stephen L. Miller (@redsteeze) June 3, 2024
You think Democrats would have thought about repercussions before running their campaign of destructive hatred through our courts.
— Mollie (@MZHemingway) June 2, 2024
— jimtreacher.substack.com (@jtLOL) June 3, 2024
Oh you are a smart one. So curious for truth.🤡
— MAZE (@mazemoore) June 2, 2024
Are you starting to think like the rest of us? After two impeachments, four indictments, civil judgements and a felony conviction. 🤔Perhaps maybe even the most investigated man in the history of the United States. Could it be that there isn't any there, there?
— MWP (@mwpotter23) June 2, 2024
It means that the public isn't buying the Democrat Party's persecution of Trump via a weaponized bureaucracy and court system.
— AdamInHTownTX (Not a Neurologist) (@AdamInHTownTX) June 3, 2024
How about actually having some balls and engaging in a policy debate instead of just silencing or imprisoning your opposition, Pete?
"We've falsely accused this man of anything we could to stop him, and it didn't work."
— MadHaddter (@MDHadter) June 2, 2024
"Well, make an example of him so we can preserve faith in the system we perverted." pic.twitter.com/oOTSnY9WN5
I'm already onboard. You don't have to sell me on him more. No man in history has withstood this and it's amazing.
— Airborne Heel (@abnheel) June 2, 2024
We have one now. What does that mean?
— Pablo (@Pablo_1791) June 2, 2024
When is the New York Times going to look into all of the Biden family's shell corporations as they looked into the Russian collusion hoax? What business is the Biden family in, exactly? Maybe look into that.
Well isn’t that just tough. It’s time for the lawless scumbags in office to all go to prison.
— SazzygirlinCali (@RjbRocklin) June 2, 2024
That would make you an election denier and complicit in interference.
— Jon AweXome-Best Life (@RealStarMan) June 3, 2024
The people elect who they want. So you see you're complaining about how you have been unable to constrain the will of the people.
— Caesar (@caesar_pounce) June 3, 2024
We already have a criminal president — he just hasn't been tried and convicted by a kangaroo court. And we have a convicted president who's not a criminal.
***
Join the conversation as a VIP Member