54 days vs 113.

[1srelluc]

IMHO no judge should be elected, state or national......Same with US Senators.

 

[Faun]

When the matter of the United States of America vs Richard Nixon was before the court, a case involving Dick's claim he had absolute executive privilege authority covering the Watergate tapes, the SC came to a unanimous decision in 54 days from the time it agreed to hear the case.

Looking back: The Supreme Court decision that ended Nixon’s presidency
Looking back: The Supreme Court decision that ended Nixon’s presidency | Constitution Center

I think its fair to observe the Court felt a degree of urgency to decide the case in an expedited manner because of the gravity of the issues at hand.

Apparently, the Court felt similarly compelled to decide the CO ballot disqualification case quickly due to the timeline of upcoming primary votes. Deciding it, in technically divided fashion, in less than a month after oral arguments.

Then there's Trump's bizarre claim of absolute immunity for any crime he may have committed while serving in office. Today makes 113 days since the Court agreed to hear the case. This, after Jack Smith implored it to hear the case earlier since he, AND EVERYONE ELSE, understood Trump's claim was designed to delay his criminal trial for insurrection.

Special counsel asks Supreme Court to immediately decide if Trump is immune from Jan. 6 prosecution
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/do...mmediately-decide-trump-immunity-q-rcna129088

We are still waiting for a decision 2 months after the completion of oral arguments in a case that is arguably less complex than the ballot disqualification one.

In the CO case, not acting quickly meant Trump's name would not appear on the primary ballot. In the insurrection case, dragging their feet for as long as possible means the insurrection trial will not begin, or certainly not conclude, before the Nov. election. In both instances the speed, or lack thereof, in deciding the cases are to Trump's advantage.

If one is looking for a reason not to trust this court's ability to impartially apply the law, beyond upside down flags and refusals to recuse for clear conflicts of interest, one needs to look no further. Yet there is Trump, claiming the system is treating him unfairly.

Looks like Merchan should just sentence Trump to prison next month.

 

[Smokin' OP]

LOL.....It's just killing the leftist dems that their lawfare trials are being held up by SCOTUS.

Teabaggers whining about "Lawfare" because their dear leader broke the law.

Hey, when you see fencing going up at the SC building you know that the end is nigh.

 

[rightwinger]

SCOTUS has a mission
Delay Trumps trials until after the election

They are doing a great job

Their decision will end up kicking it down to a lower court for clarification delaying a No Brainer decision even further

 

[berg80]

90% re-election rate, dufus.

Let's see if you can follow this conversation. House members face re-election every two years. SC justices never do. Meaning House members can be voted out if they are corrupt. SC justices can't. Is that easy enough for you to understand, nitwit?

 

[berg80]

Teabaggers whining about "Lawfare" because their dear leader broke the law.

They have a meme for obfuscating everything.

 

[rightwinger]

IMHO no judge should be elected, state or national......Same with US Senators.

If so, then no judge should have a lifetime appointment

We the People should elect our Senators

 

[martybegan]

If so, then no judge should have a lifetime appointment

We the People should elect our Senators

We the people elect our Representatives.

The States need their Representation back.

 

[rightwinger]

54 days vs 113.​

Reminds me of the Republican Senate confirmation of Amy Barret vs Merrick Garland

 

[TNHarley]

Let's see if you can follow this conversation. House members face re-election every two years. SC justices never do. Meaning House members can be voted out if they are corrupt. SC justices can't. Is that easy enough for you to understand, nitwit?

Listen dumbass, he implied voting for them could end corruption, and I pointed out congress. Our stupid voting block isnt known for weeding out corruption. THEY VOTE FOR IT.

 

[berg80]

SCOTUS has a mission
Delay Trumps trials until after the election

They are doing a great job

Their decision will end up kicking it down to a lower court for clarification delaying a No Brainer decision even further

The conservative supremes know there is no justification for the delay other than doing Trump's bidding, as do we all, and they just don't care. Roberts has expressed concern for his court's legacy yet he continues to ensure it will be remembered as the most hyper-partisan in history.

 

[Godboy]

Alito asked Smith's counsel if would immunity apply if the prez just made a mistake? As if the multi-faceted plot to steal the election was an oopsie.

Do you think that maybe, just maybe, he was asking about a bunch of different scenarios? Wouldnt it be weird if SC justices took on the issue of "presidential immunity" and the only thing they talked was stupid January 6th?

 

[berg80]

Listen dumbass, he implied voting for them could end corruption, and I pointed out congress. Our stupid voting block isnt known for weeding out corruption. THEY VOTE FOR IT.

He did not imply voting for the supremes would end corruption, cuck. He suggested it as a way to deal with corruption. Pay attention.

 

[Faun]

Listen dumbass, he implied voting for them could end corruption, and I pointed out congress. Our stupid voting block isnt known for weeding out corruption. THEY VOTE FOR IT.

Yeah, just look at all the MAGAts lining up to vote for a felon.

 

[TNHarley]

He did not imply voting for the supremes would end corruption, cuck. He suggested it as a way to deal with corruption. Pay attention.

Either way, parrot.

 

[berg80]

Do you think that maybe, just maybe, he was asking about a bunch of different scenarios? Wouldnt it be weird if SC justices took on the issue of "presidential immunity" and the only thing they talked was stupid January 6th?

No. They are called upon to decide the matter before them. Not concern themselves with extraneous hypotheticals.

 

[TNHarley]

Yeah, just look at all the MAGAts lining up to vote for a felon.

Exactly.
And all the Ds lining up to vote for an incestuous pedo.
The american voting block is overwhelmingly retarded.

 

[berg80]

Either way, parrot.

Still went over your head? Not surprised.

 

[Godboy]

No. They are called upon to decide the matter before them.

Youre fuckin stupid if you think that. They dont give a flying fuck about Jan 6th. No one does. They are taking up the case of "presidential immunity", not " January 6th".

 

[TNHarley]

Still went over your head? Not surprised.

Good grief.