The Supremes will aid and abet Trump's delaying tactics once again.

To clarify, that's my prediction. I should go further by saying I think it's going to come down mainly to the conservative majority. Here's how it will work.

They're going to narrow the criminal case just enough to force a lower court to make more granular distinctions between private and official conduct. Meaning rulings by a lower court that go against Individual 1 can once again be appealed. This, after already unnecessarily delaying the scheduling of today's hearing.

The end game being even if they reject Trump's arguments out of hand the timing of the ruling will prevent a completion of the docs case from happening prior to the election. Which, after all, is what the entire exercise is about from Trump's perspective.

 

I think they should delay it for a few more months. DELAYS are really his best defense against all of the illegal lawfare being waged against him. Anyway, i agree with your prediction. I think you are onto something.

 

Now if only Biden's DoJ didn't delay the prosection by a couple years to time the prosecutions for the campaign season... I notice everyone who is upset at the current pace had no problem with the DoJ delaying it for longer.

 

The President, in an emergency, may need to authorize truly horrible things for the safety of the American People. That is why we have never clarified this issue and why no one wants to. We don't want the president and the administration in a position, where after serving, a trio like Bribed Joe, Lying Jack and Dirtbag Merrick can make the rest of their lives a living hell.

The Court has a much easier out. Lying Jack was never appointed by the President nor confirmed by the Senate when he was appointed to this position. Dirtbag Merrick has never been granted by Congress the authority he pretended to have, when he went outside the 92 presidentially appointed and senate confirmed US Attorneys to make Lying Jack the Special Counsel.

Send Lying Jack packing, he's neither legally nor constitutionally authorized to handle any of this.

https://reason.com/volokh/2024/04/23/the-narrowest-ground-for-deciding-trump-v-united-states/

 

What's the rush buddy?

 

They have a democratic election they want to interfere with. Due process be damned.

 

But Biden is awesome. What do they have to fear? This seems like a strange way to try and win an election.

 

So, you're saying that the Justices that believe in reading and interpreting the actual law will be the deciding vote, rather than the touchy-feely, living-constitution looneys. That's a good thing.

 

I appreciate your acknowledgement of Garland's efforts in restoring apolitical decision making by the DoJ after Billy the Bagman's overt corruption of said agency in order to protect Dear Leader.

 

So... we can finally all just admit that this non-sense is all politically driven to attempt to weaponize our justice system to impact the election. Agreed, been saying that all along. Thank you for admitting it finally.

Otherwise, there would be absolutely no issue with the timelines for the trial.

It's pretty disgusting to use our justice system to go after political adversaries in an effort to impact an election. That's the kind of **** that happens in banana republics with kangaroo courts.

 

I notice you haven't made a legal argument. It's just us vs them mentality and rantings about "Billy the Bagman" and "Dear Leader." Clearly don't have a problem with the legal analysis. The problem is with the potential legal outcome and the potential to end a political case designed to influence an election to help a chosen candidate get elected. That's sad.

This is an unserious attempt to appeal to emotion and has nothing to do with the appropriate application of the law. And it further demonstrates that delaying prosection on these matters doesn't matter if the Biden administration/DoJ does the delaying. Sad!

 

A legal argument about what? My point is the Supremes will take the opportunity to string out the case by failing to state the obvious. Namely, Trump's claim of absolute immunity is ludicrous.
As for your equally ludicrous assertion the case was brought with a political goal in mind, the docs case is incredibly strong from an evidentiary perspective. So strong Trump felt compelled to do all that's possible to throw a hail Mary, or in this case a hail Aileen, hoping he'll be re-elected and thus avoid prosecution entirely. So strong a grand jury voted to indict him. An unavoidable fact you keep wanting to ignore. One that drives a stake in the heart of the "politically motivated" nonsense we endlessly hear from your side. Unless you believe the grand jury is part of the grand conspiracy to get Trump.

http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/prosecution-or-persecution.618317/#post-1074770735

 

They don't have any problem with the timing because they know the timing was designed to interfere with Trump's campaign.

 

Isn't it funny how all of his legal problems seem to materialize the moment he announced his intention to run again?

Someone would have to be as sentient as a rock not to see the connection

 

I have no problem with the SCOTUS taking their time. After all, how and what they decide will not only affect Trump, but the present president, Joe Biden and all presidents to come after. We don’t need a short sighted or a knee jerk decision just to go after Trump. The future also needs to be taken into consideration.


What is needed in my opinion is a decision that outlines limited immunity to official duties, functions, decisions of the office of the president. All job related. Nothing personal not related to those official duties. Was holding a campaign rally in Washington D.C. official presidential business, no. Was telling the Georgia secretary of state to find 11,780 votes, no. Was soliciting fake electors, no. None of those qualify as official business or duties the office of the president requires a president to do.

 

No reply all day. No surprise.

I think this type of attitude makes it all the more imperative to get Trump out of any position with the possibility of power. Permanently. If his followers are delusional we've got a delusional man and a delusional army. It won't end well.

 

Ah Scotus won't kiss leftist ass and lee, as usual can't deal with the idea that the law isn't what he wants it to be.

 

None of those qualify as crimes, either.

Not to mention, Trump never "told Georgia secretary of state to find 11,780 votes". If someone is going to go after a former president, at least make he's charged actual crimes and don't lie about what actually took place.

 

Have you checked if that's true, or you just had a bit of a guestimate...?

@CornPop @Wild Bill Kelsoe. You liked the original post. this might interest you as well:

In November 2019, Carroll filed a defamation lawsuit with the New York Supreme Court.

The New York Attorney General, Letitia James, filed a civil fraud lawsuit against Donald Trump on September 21, 2022.

Donald Trump announced his 2024 presidential campaign on November 15, 2022.

 

That's a great point. Bribed Joe has taken to making 'jokes' about how Trump is tied to a courtroom chair, during the campaign, and being drained of resources.

Will he be surprised when he is next?

 

Sceptical Supreme Court Could Hand Trump Partial Victory In Immunity Case

'...this appeal could delay lower court proceedings in President Trump’s Washington trial as well as his cases in Georgia and Florida.'

Chief Justice Roberts is fed up with the lower court's sloppy 'reasoning.'

..Roberts just slammed the lower court "a former president can be prosecuted for his official acts because the fact of the prosecution means that the former president has acted in defiance of the laws."...

...He said that he is "concerned" because it sounds like "a former president can be prosecuted because he is being prosecuted."...

'...Roberts just laid low the appellate decision and Dreeben struggled in defense of it. Roberts responded that, if the Special Counsel does not subscribe to the sweeping decision, why shouldn't the court send it back?'

'...Roberts said that the D.C. Circuit failed to do a "focused" analysis on these act by adopting a "tautological" standard...'

Make the fools rewrite it, and use their heads, this time.

 

Well that would mean that the cases, except for Scumball Bragg's could take months, if not years, to bring.

And if Trump wins, I'd say it's all over but the very loud sobbing.

After Seeing These Polls, It’s Going to Take a LOT of Cheating for Biden to Win



Say Dems steal PA, they can certainly steal an election within a point. But I doubt they can steal an election that Trump won by 4.

Plugging that in



Might be time for Bribed Joe to lawyer up and quit trying to strip post presidential immunity.

 

I'm posting in here to bookmark it so I can drag it out later on after Mango gets his ass kicked again in the election, again and his criminal trials will still continue.

Can't wait to read all the rightists posts when this happens. LOL

 

Why are you talking about Carroll? What he said was his legal problems "materialized" when Trump was talking about his "intent" to run again, not when he made his formal announcement to kick off his candidacy. Much of these investigations started long before then.

We also see a pattern of a senior Biden DoJ official leave a very cushy job in DC to downgrade himself to a much lower position in NY to start all these prosecutions and civil investigations into Trump.

Here's the timeline. Senior DoJ official helps investigate Trump on these criminal cases. November 15, 2022 Trump officially announces his candidacy. A few days later, literally, Jack Smith is appointed to take over the prosecutions of Trump at the DoJ (11/22/2022). That same senior DoJ official immediately gave notice and moves to NY to join the AG and DA offices to lead the Trump civil and criminal cases. He is hired December 5, 2022. And suddenly Trump has civil lawsuits over largely subjective valuations of properties. Then he moved to Bragg's team and starts a criminal case against Trump that both Bragg and his predecessor (Cy Vance) said wasn't a case worth pursuing.

And all of these DoJ and NY cases were coincidentally timed to go to trial at the same time over a several month period in 2024 leading up to the election.

That's a lot of coincidences. There was nothing stopping the January 6 trial from taking place years ago. There was nothing stopping the Stormy Daniels case from starting ~7 years ago within the natural statute of limitations. This was all timed to be going off for the election. The J6 cases went to trial a long time ago. But they waited, and now we're supposed to believe that it's the Supreme Court's fault this is delayed when even the prosecutors have said Chutkan and the appellate court decisions on presidential immunity were fatally flawed and they got it completely wrong? Those rulings were indefensible and they admitted that today. But they made those rulings for the sole purpose of interfering in the election. There was no viable legal theory to support them which is why the SCOTUS was forced to take the case and set an appropriate precedent.

 

Bribed Joe's clown tried to claim that the Grand Jury system would prevent politicized prosecutors from hounding former presidents, and one of the Justices quipped that even ham sandwiches aren't safe from Grand Juries.

Do you realize that if the lower Court actually has to define what in the hell they are talking about rather than write a sloppy decision based on a tautology, that the remaining cases could stretch our for months, if not years?

The entire point of all this is election fixing, what in the world will you all do now, if you can't election fix in the courtroom? Does this mean you'll actually have to convince a majority of the presidential electorate that they are better off with 4 more years of Bribed Joe, rather than 4 more years of Trump? Isn't that pretty much a disaster for you folks?