Donald Trump, US President #47, US President #45, convicted felon, twice impeached, four times indicted, liable of rape, convicted for financial fraud, guilty of hiding hush money payments to porn actress in attempt to influence 2016 elections

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › Donald Trump, US President #47, US President #45, convicted felon, twice impeached, four times indicted, liable of rape, convicted for financial fraud, guilty of hiding hush money payments to porn actress in attempt to influence 2016 elections

1 | ... | 1935 | 1936 | 1937 | 1938 | 1939 | 1940 | 1941 | 1942 | 1943 | 1944 | 1945 | ... | 2317

13925 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#3174684 22-Dec-2023 20:26

There was also the Georgia one and that didn't seem to turn off his supporters either.

Also: https://www.politico.com/news/2023/12/21/john-roberts-donald-trump-supreme-court-election-00132975 >> a look at how the court could decide next year's election result, just like they did in 2000.

quickymart

13925 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#3174827 23-Dec-2023 07:06

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/12/22/trump-biden-reelection-2020-00133089 >> what a load of absolute crap. I bet if that were to happen he would turn around (in 2028) and say "oh but there was election fraud, so I'm not going anywhere" 🙄

Sideface

9350 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3174920 23-Dec-2023 09:02

Good News for The Don 😦

The NY Times - Supreme Court Won’t Hear Case on Trump’s Immunity Defense for Now

breaking

The Supreme Court declined on Friday to decide for now whether former President Donald J. Trump is immune from prosecution on charges of plotting to overturn the 2020 election.

The case will move forward in an appeals court and most likely return to the Supreme Court in the coming months.

The decision to defer consideration of a central issue in the case was a major practical victory for Mr. Trump, whose lawyers have consistently sought to delay criminal cases against him around the country.

Jack Smith, the special counsel prosecuting Mr. Trump, has asked the justices to move with extraordinary speed, bypassing a federal appeals court.

“This case presents a fundamental question at the heart of our democracy: whether a former president is absolutely immune from federal prosecution for crimes committed while in office or is constitutionally protected from federal prosecution when he has been impeached but not convicted before the criminal proceedings begin,” Mr. Smith wrote.

A speedy decision by the justices was of the essence, Mr. Smith wrote, because Mr. Trump’s appeal of a trial judge’s ruling rejecting his claim of immunity suspends the criminal trial.

The proceeding was scheduled to begin on March 4 in Federal District Court in Washington.

Friends in high places?

Sideface

SJB

2945 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#3174923 23-Dec-2023 09:14

Sideface:

Good News for The Don 😦

The NY Times - Supreme Court Won’t Hear Case on Trump’s Immunity Defense for Now

breaking

The Supreme Court declined on Friday to decide for now whether former President Donald J. Trump is immune from prosecution on charges of plotting to overturn the 2020 election.

The case will move forward in an appeals court and most likely return to the Supreme Court in the coming months.

The decision to defer consideration of a central issue in the case was a major practical victory for Mr. Trump, whose lawyers have consistently sought to delay criminal cases against him around the country.

Jack Smith, the special counsel prosecuting Mr. Trump, has asked the justices to move with extraordinary speed, bypassing a federal appeals court.

“This case presents a fundamental question at the heart of our democracy: whether a former president is absolutely immune from federal prosecution for crimes committed while in office or is constitutionally protected from federal prosecution when he has been impeached but not convicted before the criminal proceedings begin,” Mr. Smith wrote.

A speedy decision by the justices was of the essence, Mr. Smith wrote, because Mr. Trump’s appeal of a trial judge’s ruling rejecting his claim of immunity suspends the criminal trial.

The proceeding was scheduled to begin on March 4 in Federal District Court in Washington.

Friends in high places?

Employees.

Sideface

9350 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3174962 23-Dec-2023 10:41

AlterNet - Experts weigh in on SCOTUS denying Jack Smith motion

22 Dec 2023

On Friday, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) issued a one-sentence denial of Department of Justice special counsel Jack Smith's motion to expedite hearing former President Donald Trump's immunity argument:

"The petition for a writ of certiorari before judgment is denied."

University of Texas law professor Steve Vladeck:

"All this does is kick things back to the DC Circuit, which is already set to hear argument on January 9 - and will likely rule soon thereafter ... Then, we go back to the Supreme Court."

Slate legal writer Mark Joseph Stern opined a ruling from the nation's second-highest court may come sooner than expected :

"I would venture to guess that the D.C. Circuit panel majority is already drafting an opinion that will be ready to go shortly after arguments on Jan. 9, at which point Trump goes back to SCOTUS."

New York University law professor Andrew Weissmann argued that the key issue is whether SCOTUS decides to expedite its review of the immunity question following the DC Circuit's ruling in January.

"If it doesn’t, there are too many ways for Trump to slow the appeals process down to delay any pre-election trial," he wrote.

Sideface

kingdragonfly

11190 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#3174974 23-Dec-2023 10:58

Sideface:

The NY Times - Supreme Court Won’t Hear Case on Trump’s Immunity Defense for Now

The Trump appointed Supreme Court Justices wanted to delay the inevitable so they can get their excuse sorted with their spin doctors, take an all-expense paid private jet vacation, and to do some research on growing a spine😉.

kingdragonfly

11190 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#3174985 23-Dec-2023 11:52

The Hill: Former RNC chair says Trump deserves jail for attacks on judges, court officials

Former Republican National Committee (RNC) Chair Michael Steele said in an interview that former President Trump deserves to be jailed for his consistent attacks on judges and court officials, often in violation of court order.

“It’s enormously dangerous,” he said Saturday on MSNBC. “I’m just shocked that we’ve allowed this to get this far.”
...
“Put his ass in jail. That’s how you end it. That’s how it stops,” Steele said. “Now, yeah, people will be mad, and they’ll be upset. But there is no other person on this planet — and certainly not in this country — who would be given the kind of grace that Donald Trump has been given to run his mouth the way he has, attacking the clerks, attacking the judges, attacking the prosecutors, personally, threatening them.”

Steele warned of the consequences of not applying the law equally.

“We’ve shown the evidence, when he does that, how his base responds. And so the system is getting pulverized from within by Trump. And it’s being pressed to the … umpteenth corner it can go in trying to appease him and allow him to be free while he’s still behaving this way,” he said.

“So if he wants to continue in this vein, then use the system the way the system would be used against all of us on this show right now. Because you know damn well — if any one of us said half of what Donald Trump has said we would not be on air tonight. We would be in a jail cell. We would be shut down.”
...

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79250 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#3175014 23-Dec-2023 13:18

We know that. But the idiots in America don't care.

Kyanar

4089 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#3175034 23-Dec-2023 15:09

Principles at Stake in Push to Disqualify Trump: Will of Voters and Rule of Law - The New York Times (nytimes.com)

The Colorado Supreme Court’s ruling that Donald J. Trump is constitutionally ineligible to run for president again pits one fundamental value against another: giving voters in a democracy the right to pick their leaders versus ensuring that no one is above the law.

Mr. Trump’s status as the Republican front-runner for the presidential nomination, despite his role in the events that culminated in the attack on the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, has created severe tensions between those two principles. If the court’s legal reasoning is correct, obeying the rule of law produces an antidemocratic result.

---

The dilemma invites comparisons to the Supreme Court’s intervention in the 2000 election, which overruled Florida’s Supreme Court and ensured that George W. Bush would maintain his narrow lead over Al Gore in that state to win its Electoral College votes and become the next president.

A similarity is the risk of the appearance of partisanship. In the Bush v. Gore case, the five most conservative justices ensured that the Republican candidate would prevail. Today, the U.S. Supreme Court is controlled by a supermajority of six Republican appointees, so a decision to overturn the Colorado ruling and help Mr. Trump could also carry partisan overtones.

A difference is the implications for democracy. The Florida Supreme Court in 2000 was not itself deciding the fate of the candidates but trying to allow the completion of a recount that would have clarified the will of voters. If the Supreme Court now overturns the Colorado ruling, it will be leaning in the direction of letting voters decide about Mr. Trump; upholding the state court’s ruling would be the opposite.

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79250 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#3175038 23-Dec-2023 15:26

That's a bullshit analysis. The guy is saying "Let the voters be the judge" when prosecution for trying to overthrow the government should be decided in the courtroom, not in the ballot.

Sideface

9350 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3175063 23-Dec-2023 19:09

The Times of London 03.08.23

The cartoonist (Peter Brookes) comments:

“This came out of the idea that Trump could still be president from jail, which struck me and everyone as being not only absurd, but all too possible. I love working out ways of doing something like this, and the desk was the obvious thing for me.”

Sideface

9350 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3175121 24-Dec-2023 07:39

The Republican Accountability Project (RAP) - a group of Republicans opposed to Donald Trump - has just launched a new ad campaign in five battleground states that will run during popular Christmas programming.

"Donald Trump isn't running to be the next president; he's running to be America's first dictator. We can't allow him to get anywhere near the Oval Office again."

60 seconds

Sideface

quickymart

13925 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#3175146 24-Dec-2023 09:57

https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-finished-days-supreme-court-colorado-1855179

Not sure how many times I've heard this before, yet it never happens...

Conversely: https://www.newsweek.com/nikki-haley-donald-trump-2024-gop-primary-challenge-new-hampshire-polls-1855222

Kyanar

4089 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#3175157 24-Dec-2023 10:51

Of all the options, Haley is probably the least bad if Republicans get in. Ramaswamy wants to remove the vote from under 25s (because they vote Liberal too often - can't vote against him if you can't vote!), Trump is... well. And DeSantis is... well, pretty much the star of the Political Deplorables thread. Can't comment for Christie, they could be better.

I do find it exasperating that the Trump campaign is banging on about a "Soros funded left-wing campaign" - like, seriously, get some new material. You've beaten that dead horse into a bloody pulp already. And besides, the Biden campaign didn't launch the action, Republicans, who see Trump as the danger he is, did. (Or they just prefer one of the other candidates, whatever).

SJB

2945 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#3175168 24-Dec-2023 11:54

The weird thing is that if the GOP had a middle of the road candidate he/she would win with a landslide against Biden.

It's only because they have Trump that it's close.

1 | ... | 1935 | 1936 | 1937 | 1938 | 1939 | 1940 | 1941 | 1942 | 1943 | 1944 | 1945 | ... | 2317