Presidential Immunity And More Debate Fallout | 538 Politics Podcast

To be clear, the “out” discussed if an assassination is directed is “let it happen first, then we can decide.” THAT IS BONKERS

Please bring video back! Huge week for SCOTUS. Wednesday, the Snyder ruling affirms officials can receive "gratuities" as long as it's not explicitly a bribe. Friday, Loper Bright ruling overturns Chevron deference, affirming the court is the ultimate authority on all subject matter. Monday, Trump ruling for presidential immunity.

I thought that the decision regarding bribes vs gratuities was saying that the charge of the crime in question needed to be classified as either a bribe or gratuity and then charged accordingly. This is to ensure that the proper law would be used, thereby removing the possible defense of saying that the wrong law was used. (Gratuity violations to be charged under the gratuity law and bribery violations under bribery law, instead of a gratuity violation charged under the bribery law and vice-versa. 🥴) It is NOT legalizing bribery.

What a stupid concern by the majority.... maybe if a presidential act is so outrageous that they should feel chilled by the possibility of prosecution for that act, then the president should freaking feel chilled by it! I'd rather careful conscientious acts being done by a president than acts which they have no concern for the consequences! If they were truly just they'll be defended in court.

Isn't there some virtual convention date that is happening to get ahead of the Ohio deadline, well ahead of August?

Where are the videos?

Birth of a tyrant

no video?

you forgot the video, please include it

Maybe it’s time we switch to a parliamentary system 🤷‍♂️ I support a separate executive branch but we are giving one man too much power. I wonder if it be better if the executive branch were run by a group of people rather than one individual. Or even run by the legislative branch with more checks on power. Especially considering how Project 2025 wants to turn our independent bureaucracy into a group of yes-men to Trump. But this decision is incredible. It puts the president above the law. Even official acts, if a president commits a war crime, they can’t be tried. It’s very dangerous.

Seal team six a things now?

I voted for Biden in the primary and wilk write him on in the general election if need be

This is a much better presentation if it done live.

Invest in Bitcoin before retiring by diversifying across assets, allocating a small portion of your portfolio, staying updated on market trends, and considering long-term holding to balance risk and growth..

Doesn’t the criticism of populism(just because it is popular doesn’t mean it’s good or right) apply with popularity polls towards court decisions?

This is a revelation. I thought, when I first heard the ruling, that they had ruled mostly against him. Unofficial acts are not protected; that’s what I took from it. The fact that official acts are protected did not seem like a surprise.

I'm so tired of hearing the word "performance" tied to Joe Biden's debate appearance. It wasn't the performance that shock viewers. The shocking element was the clearly unveiled SENILITY. Being senile doesn't involve performance. It's a sad consequence of age, for which there is no cure.

I watch about 70% or so of your stuff

I’m not sure I agree with Nathaniel’s certainty that if there’s a different Democratic nominee that it will absolutely be Kamala Harris. It very well could be, but if things get to that point all “she’s the VP” precedent goes out the window while they try to pick who they think would be the very best option to win. That may or may not be Harris

When Nathaniel says if Biden drops out then it will be Harris, why is it a foregone conclusion it would be Harris?