Supreme Court Agrees to Hear Trump’s Immunity Claim, Setting Arguments for April

archives said:
Exactly, which will then lead to proving Trump thought he was acting “directly relating to the job,” that he really believed the election was bogus and he was aiding America by halting the erroneous transfer of power, the exact decision Trump wants, which could also pretty much make him immune from any prosecution even having the SS kill a political opponent
Click to expand...

should biden do something similar to save democracy?
 
archives said:
Really, I think most know, the most important decision they will have this term, one with a major impact on the upcoming election, and you can’t hypothesize why they slow walked it? They didn’t slow walk the Colorado case, certainly not Gore/Bush, and really didn’t offer any reason for taking up this case which is usually customary for the Court
Click to expand...

They changed the question presented, to a much more generalized issue that will take nuance. Any ruling on the new question presented will lead to more appeals, and more delays. They will not generally fuck with the law, but they will fuck with procedure. The conservatives want Trump because they want more Conservative justices.
 
ExpressLane said:
Yes if it was an immediate need for sitting President but not so much need for a former president. So there is no need to expedite the trial.
Click to expand...

There is a need for the most likely Republican nominee to be cleared or convicted before the election.
 
Jarod said:
The final decision will be 7-2 or 7-1, they are not that bold... but if they can delay and get away with it, 4 of them certainly will.
Click to expand...

Agreed on what the final decision was, but five votes were required to stay the trial, and I'm guessing that Roberts was not with the majority on this one. The problem is the stay, at least in my mind.
 
Let's talk about what this decision by the court will set as a precedent, for all past, current, and future presidents to follow.

This case is about Donald Trump's insane notion, that a president has total immunity from investigations, indictments, subpoenas, prosecutions, law suits, and arrests.

If a president has total immunity, then BY LAW, a president would have the legal authority to assassinate whomever he chooses- INCLUDING JUSTICES ON THE SUPREME COURT.

Yes, that is just what America needs, is a president that has the legal authority to commit murder, fraud, corruption, carry out terrorist and traitorous acts, and insurrections.

WHAT COULD GO WRONG THERE?

But, if this is the SUPREME COURT'S DECISION, to grant the president FULL IMMUNITY, then I recommend OUR CURRENT PRESIDENT use this new privilege, established by the new precedent established by the current corrupted version of the Supreme Court, to assassinate DONALD TRUMP, who corrupted the office of the president, and assassinate Donald Trump's hand selected Justices that corrupted the Supreme Court.

SO YOU GO JUSTICES!

PLEASE GIVE BIDEN THE FULL LEGAL AUTHORITY TO HAVE YOU AND DONALD TRUMP ASSASSINATED!

Wham Bam- THANK YOU MAM!

LET'S GET ER' DONE!

AND THE SOONER THE BETTER!

NEXT!
 
Last edited:
Frank Apisa said:
We are all fucked...INCLUDING YOU DELUDED TRUMP ASSKISSERS...for the reasons I suggested. Joe Biden won the last election fair and square...just as Trump won the 2016 election fair and square.

You people have now been ordered to accept that any election that does not go your way...was not fair and square.

Okay...now continue with your delusions.
Click to expand...

Dont get so worked up. Its not like you will have to go to one of the forced labor camps,...your too old for that. Nope,....not for you. You only get the gallows is all ! :laugh:
 
Geeko Sportivo said:
Let's talk about what this decision by the court will set as a precedent, for all past, current, and future presidents to follow.

This case is about Donald Trump's insane notion, that a president has total immunity from investigations, indictments, subpoenas, prosecutions, law suits, and arrests.

If a president has total immunity, then BY LAW, a president would have the legal authority to assassinate whomever he chooses- INCLUDING JUSTICES ON THE SUPREME COURT.

Yes, that is just what America needs, is a president that has the legal authority to commit murder, fraud, corruption, carry out terrorist, traitorous acts, and insurrections.

WHAT COULD GO WRONG THERE?

But, if this is the SUPREME COURT'S DECISION, to grant the president FULL IMMUNITY, then I recommend OUR CURRENT PRESIDENT use this new privilege, established by the new precedent established by the current Supreme Court, to assassinate DONALD TRUMP, who corrupted the office of the president, and assassinate Donald Trump's hand selected Justices that corrupted the Supreme Court.

SO YOU GO JUSTICES!

PLEASE GIVE BIDEN THE FULL LEGAL AUTHORITY TO HAVE YOU ASSASSINATED!

LET'S GET ER' DONE!

AND THE SOONER THE BETTER!

NEXT!
Click to expand...

a president has legal immunity due to keeping lawfare out of politics.

but relax, it only requires one extra step, an impeachment.


that was tried twice.

you're just a deranged political imbecile.

don't worry. society will correct for your perversions.
 
Damocles said:
The claim is a blanket immunity that seems way too far reaching IMHO. The argument seems to be: There is a path to go to when a President has overreached and that path was taken. So, the claim is that if we think a President has overreached we can impeach, if that fails then they claim there is an immunity that applies once they are outside office, if they are convicted they can certainly be tried for whatever crime it is, but if they are not convicted in the Senate they are claiming an immunity for the activity... If we didn't impeach then once they leave office it is "too late". We traveled the impeachment path for some of this, we haven't for other parts... I just have a hard time believing that they will hand "blanket immunity" to a President to commit crimes that have nothing to do with the execution of the job so long as he isn't impeached. I'm interested to hear the arguments so we can know more.
Click to expand...

If they do, Biden could just assassinate Trump. And Dems would block conviction. So of course this argument is so ludicrous on it's face that there was absolutely no reason for the Supreme Court to weigh in. So why did they, and in such a manner that the trial court has discretion and that discretion can be appealed. I'm not sure if a trial could even continue if that question fo 'official duties' is not answered. Why didn't they address the specific question? I have to question their motivations, but in the end, the voters will decide. There is not one person in America who can read these indictments and pretend Trump isn't guilty. So I seriously doubt a conviction would even move the needle. Trump voters simply don't care about the character and integrity of their guy. It speaks volumes about Trump supporters.
 
When Nixon was stealing the election, the Supremes made decisions overnight. There were a couple of cases and they were taken care of immediately. This court is hyper-political and right wing.
 
Damocles said:
These are the courts that have served us for centuries, usually to the benefit of the left. At some point in the future there will doubtless be another Democrat facing what you will then call "politicized lawfare", and you would want to have this. I get that you would rather Trump not get his day before the SCOTUS, and I understand that you believe they are "slow walking" everything (though you know that stuff you bring to the SCOTUS is rarely heard just a month later, this is what the SCOTUS would call "ludicrous speed" if they were in a Mel Brooks movie), you will one day be glad for the pace the courts work, though I fear you will not reflect on the day you thought that such a path should be unavailable to folks you feel are your opponents.
Click to expand...

While partisan lines could always be seen in the Courts, to some extent this era is very different and deliberately so.

Steve Bannon and others on the right have spoken freely about how Trump, fed by the Federalist society has really reshaped the court and that is by ONLY selecting hard core theists who put religious belief over law and the Constitution into contention for both entry level jobs and promotion.

They use the words BETRAYED by prior consider 'great' SC republican nominees, who were 'too intellectual' and thus could be 'swayed' over to join the Dem's on a vote and they vowed to change that by staying away from the more intellectual ones and picking dumber ideologues who are less likely to be swayed.

We have seen two such exposed in Aileen Cannon and Matthew Kaczmarek, but there are ranks of them in the lower courts right now, who will be the ONLY names on the list to bump up to the appellate courts and SC by the Federalist society, which is the sole source now for Judges on the right. And all judges on the right will know this, that there simply is NO PATH to progress if you ever put logic and reason over ideology.

You will see this as a few like Cannon and Kaczmarek, who were on the fast track for the higher courts continue to get exposed as they are forced to play their hands on lower court cases before getting up to the top ranks. But there are lots more in the wings.

The right is doing this in all areas and not shy about telling us. They expect only partisan decisions with no compromise or bipartisan decisions whether it the SC or COngress or a school board.
 
Jarod said:
They sure moved faster on a briefing schedule for deciding if Trump could be on the ballot. They moved faster in Bush v. Gore, they moved faster in the Nixon case, they moved faster in many cases that we of critical importance.
Click to expand...

there was a break down of all such cases and EVERY one they moved faster was when requested and it would benefit a Republican Potus to do so and the SC had a conservative majority.

COnversely the ones that do not get the super fast movement, are ones like this that could jeopardize a republican Potus and again their is conservative majority.
 
Concart said:
Agreed on what the final decision was, but five votes were required to stay the trial, and I'm guessing that Roberts was not with the majority on this one. The problem is the stay, at least in my mind.
Click to expand...

I agree.
 
QP! said:
there was a break down of all such cases and EVERY one they moved faster was when requested and it would benefit a Republican Potus to do so and the SC had a conservative majority.

COnversely the ones that do not get the super fast movement, are ones like this that could jeopardize a republican Potus and again their is conservative majority.
Click to expand...

Id like to see that, do you have that breakdown. I believe you are correct, but havent seen such.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top