Smith trying to get Trump convicted before election, says Attorney Jonathan Turley

[Nostra]

Prices aren't going up ya moron.
Holy Shit.
Have you been shopping lately? Hell No you haven't.

1). Are Eggs 4% more than last month? NO
2). Is Meat 4% more than last month? NO
3). Is gas 4% more than last month? NO

In Fact, can you name a single product that is 4% higher than last month.

Wow. You really are stupid. I mean, nuclear powered stupid.

 

[jknowgood]

And who told you that - Trump, the professional victim.

No I saw it.

 

[konradv]

Supreme Court: Trump must respond to special counsel’s presidential immunity petition before Christmas

The Supreme Court has agreed to expedite this appeal and asked Trump’s lawyers to respond to the motion by next Wednesday December 20

www.foxnews.com

This blows me away

But why should it? I should be used to the childish, un-American, demonic, anti-Christ BS of the left.


from site

If the justices get involved, they would have an opportunity to rule for the first time on whether ex-presidents enjoy immunity from prosecution. Justice Department policy prohibits the indictment of a sitting president.

Elsewhere from site:

Trump lawyers, meanwhile, have said he cannot be charged for actions that fell within his official duties as president — a claim that prosecutors have vigorously rejected.

Comment:

It says "Trump cannot be charged for actions that fell within his official duties as president."

isn't it part of a president's duties to uphold the Constitution?

Election laws were violated in the last election, laws written in the US Constitution which states that the state legislators have control over election places, times and procedures. Yet, last time, governors and others usurped the state legislatures.

Of course it has to be done before Election Day. The people need a resolution to make an informed choice.

 

[TheGreatSatan]

I think it is in the public interest that Donald's trials be resolved before the election, so that the American people can make an informed decision, and one that isn't tainted by an ongoing criminal procedure.

Let the people vote. WEF/Democrats are using the courts to attack a rival in an election year. These cases could have been brought long ago, and would have, if they were legit.

 

[SeaMajor7]

Stalinists gonna Stalin

 

[Blaster]

Of course it has to be done before Election Day. The people need a resolution to make an informed choice.

Most folks have already decided who to vote for.

 

[jbrownson0831]

I guess that depends on whether an election might subsequently factor into the normal judicial process.

The two things are separate from each other.

 

[hadit]

If these folks are allowed to incarcerate the leading opposition candidate for POTUS, America is over. The chances are actually quite good that if after everything else these Marxists have done or attempted, they actually convict him and put him in prison, he's apt to win by a landslide. What then?

If he is POTUS, he pardons himself and it's all over but the shouting. What democrats fail to realize, however, is that once they open the door to a previously unused power or political tactic, the door remains open, and that just means that it won't be long before a democrat running for office will suddenly find himself snarled up in trials, depositions, and legal maneuvers forced on him by the deep pocketed opposition. Then, suddenly, democrats will re-discover that they really don't like that happening and will demand that it stop, but it won't, and Banana Republic, here we are.

Democrats frequently do this to themselves.

 

[kyzr]

wrong

Trump has a legal right to the full appeal process to allow him on the 2024 ballot.
The USSC should say that they want to see how the full appeal process takes shape to consider all of the various arguments and how the laws were interpreted.
There is no reason to expedite the review except to take Trump to court, get a conviction to not allow voters a choice, the end of democracy, the government of the Banana Republic of the US controls the candidates.

 

[BlindBoo]

Election laws were violated in the last election, laws written in the US Constitution which states that the state legislators have control over election places, times and procedures. Yet, last time, governors and others usurped the state legislatures.

No such law exists in the Constitution.

One unusual feature of the Elections Clause is that it does not confer the power to regulate congressional elections on states as a whole, but rather the “Legislature” of each state. The Supreme Court has construed the term “Legislature” extremely broadly to include any entity or procedure that a state’s constitution permits to exercise lawmaking power. Thus, laws regulating congressional elections may be enacted not only by a state’s actual legislature, but also directly by a state’s voters through the initiative process or public referendum, in states that allow such procedures.

The Court also has held that a legislature may delegate its authority under the Elections Clause to other entities or officials.

Interpretation: Elections Clause | Constitution Center

Interpretations of Elections Clause by constitutional scholars

constitutioncenter.org

All the states have delegated the presidential elector selection to the democratic vote of the people mostly in a winner take all of the States EC votes. Two states divide that up by voting districts. These are the laws on the books in every state. Changing those election laws would simply not be retroactive. I dare them to try and take away that voting power from the people.

 

[BluesLegend]

(cough) DEM Election RIGGING (cough)

 

[BS Filter]

That says far more about you than the Democrats.

It tells me democrats are abusing the justice system like a third world country.

 

[BS Filter]

As if you know their business better than them.

Giving my opinion, you idiot.

 

[schmidlap]

Supreme Court: Trump must respond to special counsel’s presidential immunity petition before Christmas

The Supreme Court has agreed to expedite this appeal and asked Trump’s lawyers to respond to the motion by next Wednesday December 20

www.foxnews.com

This blows me away

But why should it? I should be used to the childish, un-American, demonic, anti-Christ BS of the left.


from site

If the justices get involved, they would have an opportunity to rule for the first time on whether ex-presidents enjoy immunity from prosecution. Justice Department policy prohibits the indictment of a sitting president.

Elsewhere from site:

Trump lawyers, meanwhile, have said he cannot be charged for actions that fell within his official duties as president — a claim that prosecutors have vigorously rejected.

Comment:

It says "Trump cannot be charged for actions that fell within his official duties as president."

isn't it part of a president's duties to uphold the Constitution?

Election laws were violated in the last election, laws written in the US Constitution which states that the state legislators have control over election places, times and procedures. Yet, last time, governors and others usurped the state legislatures.

There is no reason why any of the courts in which the 2016 presidential Loser is being tried for 91 felonies should put them all on hold because he happens to be aspiring to recidivism.

 

[BS Filter]

There is no reason why any of the courts in which the 2016 presidential Loser is being tried for 91 felonies should put them all on hold because he happens to be aspiring to recidivism.

View attachment 872457​

You twats need to get over it. You've been throwing a hissy fit for 7 years.

 

[Nostra]

There is no reason why any of the courts in which the 2016 presidential Loser is being tried for 91 felonies should put them all on hold because he happens to be aspiring to recidivism.

View attachment 872457​

Due process.

Look it up, vermin.

 

[schmidlap]

You twats need to get over it. You've been throwing a hissy fit for 7 years.

I understand your need to lash out irrationally.

You are pissy because your Loser lost and keeps whining about it.

 

[schmidlap]

Due process.

Look it up, vermin.

"Due process" means applying the normal legal procedures without needless delays, Tinker Bell.

 

[BS Filter]

I understand your need to lash out irrationally.

You are pissy because your Loser lost and keeps whining about it.

You twats have been whining ever since Trump beat Hillary, and you're still crying. You're abusing the justice system for political reasons. You're sick.

 

[Nostra]

"Due process" means applying the normal legal procedures without needless delays, Tinker Bell.

Yep. Jerk Smith has dumped tens of thousands of documents on Trump’s lawyers and doesn’t want to give them adequate time to go thru them.

The little Nazi even told them he would tell them which ones he plans to use So they don’t need time to review them all.