Is a Constitutional Crisis looming? (Poll)

[kyzr]

Conservative judges have been slowing things down, intentionally.
If these cases are lawfare, then you’d want them resolved before the election. But you don’t, because you know that he’s in the wrong.
The voters should know if Trump is responsible for attempting to deprive citizens of their constitutional rights or if he attempted to obstruct justice. But you don’t want them to know that.

1. Conservative judges are working thru the legal process. No one is slowing anything down.

2. What cases? If you want them resolved before the election you should have filed them sooner.

3. What cases did Trump deprive citizens of anything, or obstruct anything. You post in generalities that mean nothing.

 

[Marener]

1. Conservative judges are working thru the legal process. No one is slowing anything down.

2. What cases? If you want them resolved before the election you should have filed them sooner.

3. What cases did Trump deprive citizens of anything, or obstruct anything. You post in generalities that mean nothing.

SCOTUS could have taken up the issue of presidential immunity earlier but said that they had to go through the full appeals process first.

But now you demand SCOTUS do the opposite and rule immediately without going through the regular legal process first.

One instance slows down the resolution of his court case and the other instance accelerates a potential reversal of his guilty verdict.

The only difference is that you want to help Trump get elected. It has nothing to do with what is best for the voters.

 

[kyzr]

SCOTUS could have taken up the issue of presidential immunity earlier but said that they had to go through the full appeals process first.
But now you demand SCOTUS do the opposite and rule immediately without going through the regular legal process first.
One instance slows down the resolution of his court case and the other instance accelerates a potential reversal of his guilty verdict.
The only difference is that you want to help Trump get elected. It has nothing to do with what is best for the voters.

1. Presidential immunity needs to go thru the full appeals process.
2. I don't demand anything, I said that the appeals for the NY hush-money case should be expedited so voters see the truth before voting.
3. So you want Trump put at a disadvantage, I want Trump to have a fair shot. That is simply partisan politics.
4. You don't remember that Special Prosecutor Hur declined to indict Joe Biden because he's too old and has memory issues, i.e. he's too mentally incompetent to stand trial.

We'll see during the debates how both candidates look to the voters.

 

[Marener]

1. Presidential immunity needs to go thru the full appeals process.
2. I don't demand anything, I said that the appeals for the NY hush-money case should be expedited so voters see the truth before voting.
3. So you want Trump put at a disadvantage, I want Trump to have a fair shot. That is simply partisan politics.
4. You don't remember that Special Prosecutor Hur declined to indict Joe Biden because he's too old and has memory issues, i.e. he's too mentally incompetent to stand trial.

We'll see during the debates how both candidates look to the voters.

If the presidential immunity matter doesn’t need to be expedited, then the NY case doesn’t need to end expedited.

 

[kyzr]

If the presidential immunity matter doesn’t need to be expedited, then the NY case doesn’t need to end expedited.

ok, as long as the reverse is true.

 

[Marener]

ok, as long as the reverse is true.

SCOTUS is on record saying the presidential immunity doesn’t need to be expedited.

They do not think the voters need to know the truth.

So it would also apply to the NY case.

 

[Delldude]

Conservative judges have been slowing things down, intentionally.

Guess you didn't read the rebuke from the 11th court of appeals regarding these accusations orchestrated by one Glenn Kirchner?

Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals chief judge William Pryor, in a May 22 order, rejected four complaints against Cannon for their lack of evidence to suggest that Cannon is engaging in misconduct:
“These complaints appear to be part of an orchestrated campaign, as described in Judicial-Conduct Rule 10(b) and the accompanying commentary. The Chief Circuit Judge of the Eleventh Circuit has considered and dismissed four of those orchestrated complaints as merits-related and as based on allegations lacking sufficient evidence to raise an inference that misconduct has occurred.”
The judge adds: “Although many of the complaints allege an improper motive in delaying the case, the allegations are speculative and unsupported by any evidence. The Complaints also do not establish that Judge Cannon was required to recuse herself from the case because she was appointed by then-President Trump.”
More than 1,000 complaints were made against Cannon by liberals seeking to have her removed from the case for supposedly ruling in Trump’s favor throughout the proceedings, CNBC reported. The Eleventh Circuit’s judicial council ordered the court clerk to not accept additional complaints against Cannon if they are similar to the four Pryor dismissed. Cannon’s orders in the classified-documents case are subject to the normal appeals process.
Former federal prosecutor Glenn Kirschner kickstarted the campaign to remove Cannon, urging listeners of his podcast to file complaints against her. To accompany his episode explaining why he believes she should be removed, he posted a YouTube video instructing fans how to file a complaint against Cannon.

Judge Rejects ‘Orchestrated Campaign’ to Remove Trump-Appointed Judge from Classified-Docs Case | National Review

More than 1,000 complaints have been made against Aileen Cannon for her supposedly ruling in Trump’s favor throughout the proceedings.

www.nationalreview.com

SCOTUS is on record saying the presidential immunity doesn’t need to be expedited.

It never was, however,

SCOTUS will rule on 28 cases in the next three weeks.....one of which should be on immunity.

 

[kyzr]

SCOTUS is on record saying the presidential immunity doesn’t need to be expedited.

They do not think the voters need to know the truth.

So it would also apply to the NY case.

They don't see voters as the issue. The question is presidential immunity.
If you wanted the voters to know "the truth" then the cases should have been brought years ago.

 

[Marener]

They don't see voters as the issue. The question is presidential immunity.
If you wanted the voters to know "the truth" then the cases should have been brought years ago.

If the voters aren’t the issue then there’s no reason rush a decision on the NY case.

The other cases could have been decided by now if not for conservative judges dragging their feet to benefit Trump.

 

[Delldude]

If the voters aren’t the issue then there’s no reason rush a decision on the NY case.

No chance of election interference by the courts?

The other cases could have been decided by now if not for conservative judges dragging their feet to benefit Trump.

No one has been dragging their feet, do you have examples?