![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
Rikkitic:
Why would Canada want them? Just importing America's problems.
Because I doubt they will be crying about all the rapists, murderers, and drug dealers coming across the southern boarder. Quite apart from the fact that people who have publicly opposed Trump or testified against him will be targeted by Trump mobs.
It's like Georgia all over again for Rudy and co, except this time it's Arizona! 😀
I bet John McCain would be disgusted with his fellow Arizona Republicans.
The NY Times - Supreme Court Live Updates: Conservative Majority Seems Ready to Limit Election Case Against Trump
breaking
The Supreme Court’s conservative majority appeared to ready on Thursday to rule that former presidents have substantial immunity from criminal prosecution, a move that would further delay the criminal case against former President Donald J. Trump on charges that he plotted to subvert the 2020 election.
Such a ruling would most likely send the case back to the trial court to draw distinctions between official and private conduct.
Those proceedings could make it hard to conduct the trial before the 2024 election.
Bad news, but not unexpected. 😦
Sideface
"Those proceedings could make it hard to conduct the trial before the 2024 election."
Job done.
I couldn't believe hearing those politically biased Jurors for life on the broadcast discussion.
god help the USA and all of the rest of the world.
How ridiculous. So Biden could get Trump assassinated under the latter's "thinking" or "logic" and it's all good? Spare me.
quickymart:
How ridiculous. So Biden could get Trump assassinated under the latter's "thinking" or "logic" and it's all good? Spare me.
I don't believe the majority of the SC judges are saying that. The implication is that only some actions would be exempt from prosecution. Even Amy Coney Barrett seemed to rule out complete immunity.
US Supreme Court divided on whether Trump can be prosecuted - BBC News
'Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.' Voltaire
'A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government.' Edward Abbey
and ...
Tanya S. Chutkan, Federal judge (01 December 2023):
“Whatever immunities a sitting president may enjoy, the United States has only one chief executive at a time, and that position does not confer a lifelong ‘get-out-of-jail-free’ pass."
“The Defendant’s four-year service as commander in chief did not bestow on him the divine right of kings to evade the criminal accountability that governs his fellow citizens.”
Sideface
So, looking at the above list, one could argue that, indeed, Trump is a winner. But I don't quite think this is exactly the "winning" he told Americans they were going to get tired of.
Or maybe it is.
Also from The Guardian ....
Analysis - Trump the elephant in the room as supreme court hearing strays into the surreal
25 April 2024
Justices heard immunity arguments - and the conservative majority seemed determined to talk about anything but the case at hand.
It took two hours and 24 minutes for the elephant in the room to be mentioned at Thursday’s US supreme court hearing. “The special counsel has expressed some concern for speed, and wanting to move forward,” said Justice Amy Coney Barrett.
The supreme court has already moved at such a snail’s pace that the chances of the case coming to trial before November’s presidential election – in which the accused is once again standing for the most powerful job on Earth – are growing slim. ...
Which would play exactly into Trump’s hands.
From day one, Trump’s strategy has been delay, delay, delay – with the endgame of kicking the prosecutorial can so far down the road that he can win re-election and appoint a manipulable attorney general who will scrap all charges, or even pardon himself.
I recommend reading the entire (short) opinion piece.
Sideface
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |