Supreme Court thumbing the scale for Trump.

[progressive hunter]

Funny how the entire media establishment spews same line on every story and libs lap it up without question but they are the smart ones oohhhhh yessss

theyre in a cult and dont even know it,,

 

[progressive hunter]

Your point was that it's not illegal, which I addressed as being moot.

What is your new argument exactly?

your opinion is irrelevant,,

the law is what counts,,

what is your new argument exactly??

 

[Manonthestreet]

There are no exmaples of criminal prosecution against presidents before Trump.

Nixon WOULD have been prosecuted, but Ford pardoned him and in doing so prevented due process from taking place and presidential immunity claims to be settled back in the day.

Trump and this coservative majority SC is now seemingly using that to stall and possibly kill due process against Trump.

Doesnt have to be a President.....you've had eight yrs of non-stop lawfare to no avail and just keep flinging crap at the wall. Libs have burnt out many peoples give a damn on it.

 

[AntonToo]

your opinion is irrelevant,,

the law is what counts,,

what is your new argument exactly??

There is a law regulating when Supreme Court elects to hear or rule on a case?

No there isn't, stop posting bs.

It's not a question of law, it's a question of court's integrity and partisan partiality.

 

[IDIOCRACY]

Conservative SC majority is now shedding any pretence still left to partisan impartiality.

Trump has little to stand on in his criminal trials, so his only end game is delaying them long enough to again make it to the White House and put himself above the law.

Nobody seriously thinks SC is going to grant Trump immunity, nobody thinks they will overturn iron-clad lower court ruling....but we have a Supreme Court that seems to be willing to use that excuse to play along and halt Trump's criminal trials for months, making it near impossible from them to complete before election.

It's been 135 days since Jack Smith asked the court to expedite descision on immunuty...nope! They insist on taking no less than 5 months to settle an obvious no-brainer outcome.

Even if there was some argument about how busy they are or how complex of case this is , they still didn't have to do it this way. SC could have simply allowed the trials to go on, while they square away these go-nowhere immunity claims.

In Taking Up Trump’s Immunity Claim, Supreme Court Bolstered His Delay Strategy

By scheduling a hearing for late April on the former president’s assertion that he cannot be prosecuted for his actions in office, the justices increased the chances that he will not face trial by Election Day.

www.nytimes.com

We knew Thomas was an unrepentant Trumptard and Alito is not far behind, but for the rest to go along with this ridiculous shit?

This marks a whole new low for Supreme Court, whole new level of partisanship and this is not going to end well.

I think you have the brains of a turnip snowflake. First off, the SCOTUS is hearing a case about an insurrection that your kind MADE UP. Even if SCOTUS decides that Trump is not immune, the left has zero, I say ZERO chance for a successful prosecution. You're simply trying to prepare your thin skin for a certain loss.

 

[progressive hunter]

There is a law regulating when Supreme Court elects to hear or rule on a case?

No there isn't, stop posting bs.

is there a law that restricts what they can hear or rule on a case??

and if so how does this violate it??

 

[AntonToo]

is there a law that restricts what they can hear or rule on a case??

and if so how does this violate it??

It's not a question of law, it's a question of court's integrity and partisan partiality.

How about reading and reposponding to what you read instead of repeating same thing over and over?

 

[progressive hunter]

How about reading and reposponding to what you read instead of repeating same thing over and over?

so that would be a no there is no law that restricts them,,

so for you this is all political and dont really care about what the law says but only your feelings matter,,

 

[AntonToo]

Even if SCOTUS decides that Trump is not immune, the left has zero, I say ZERO chance for a successful prosecution.

Great! So wouldn't you want that case to proceed, fail and Trump to get cleared?

SC would rule in timely manner that Trump is (of course) not immune and then the case can proceed and fail well before election.

If you really belive what you say, why aren't you upset that Trump might not get a chance to clear himself of what you consider ridiculous charges before election? Why aren't you upset they are making themselves and Trump look bad?

 

[IDIOCRACY]

Great! So wouldn't you want that case to proceed, fail and Trump to get cleared?

SC would rule in timely manner that Trump is (of course) not immune and then the case can proceed and fail well before election.

If you really belive what you say, why aren't you upset that Trump might not get a chance to clear himself of what you consider ridiculous charges before election? Why aren't you upset they are making themselves and Trump look bad?

Again....................When one side makes shit up to prosecute another, you use everything at your disposal to fight the maggots off.

 

[AntonToo]

so that would be a no there is no law that restricts them,,

so for you this is all political and dont really care about what the law says but only your feelings matter,,

You saying it's ok that they are a partisan rag just because there is no law against it is planly stupid and shortsighted.

How many times in how many ways do you want that explained to you?

Biden can win 2024 election, get a few more democrat seats in congress and then proceed to shape it (completely legaly) to be a Democrat majority court, followed by Republicans winning at some point and doing the same.

This is where this is headed - a tribal fight at every step, every institution.

 

[progressive hunter]

You saying it's ok that they are a partisan rag just because there is no law against it is planly stupid and shortsighted.

How many times in how many ways do you want that explained to you?

Biden can win 2024 election, get a few more democrat seats in congress and then proceed to shape it (completely legaly) to be a Democrat majority court, followed by Republicans winning at some point and doing the same.

This is where this is headed.

being partisan is your delusion not mine,,

how about we stick to facts and law and not what you heard in your cult meetings??

 

[AntonToo]

Again....................When one side makes shit up to prosecute another, you use everything at your disposal to fight the maggots off.

Ahh but now your are dodging the obvious.

If you feel there is no real case against Trump, that the charges won't hold in court of law, then why are you supporting SC stalling it on the dubious side question of presidential immunity?

Can you explain yourself?

 

[progressive hunter]

Ahh but now your are dodging the resonable question.

If you feel there is no real case against Trump, that it will fail in a court of law, then why are you supporting SC stalling it on the dubious side question of presidential immunity?

can you give an answer that makes sense?

if you think there is a case against trump why are you wanting to deny him due process rights??

 

[Seymour Flops]

Why wouldn't I be upset?

By SC putting their thumb on the scale so blatantly it is undermining it's legitimacy, undermining the very foundation of the third branch of our governing that is supposed be at least somewhat isolated from partisan politics.

This is true when it comes to Trump who I obviously think is an abject piece of shit, but I also would be concerned if this a was piece of shit Democrat trying to weasel his way out of criminal cases with lefty court was playing along this blatantly.

Dude, all they did was agree to hear the case. You want Trump to be on trial but you don’t want him to have access to the courts. Can’t have it both ways.

Think twice, because the preceedent here is very corosive to our democracy as a law based system where NO ONE is above the law.

So if the GOP installs partisan prosecutors to go after the next Democratic frontrunner, the courts might interfere with their election driven timetable also?

 

[IDIOCRACY]

Ahh but now your are dodging the resonable question.

If you feel there is no real case against Trump then why are you supporting SC stalling it on the question of presidential immunity?

No I'm not, I already made it clear, but I'll say it again, cuz you're slow. Probably slow on the courts too.

A. When maggots make shit up, such as to weaponize the justice system to throw a POTUS election in their favor, the accused should use EVERYTHING at their disposal to fight those maggots off. Trump's team is doing exactly that.

B. I suspect the SCOTUS will rule Trump's not immune to your poison.

C. Then Trump will receive the antidote in court, because there's no way in fuck this insurrection business will stick anywhere beyond inside that tiny head of yours, and those like it.

Clear enough?

 

[theHawk]

What is your take on SC's behavior here?

Post something, ANYTHING, constructive.

What behavior? Not bending their schedule to meet Jack Smith’s?

LOL

 

[IDIOCRACY]

Here's one for you leftists, why shouldn't SCOTUS hear the case?

Because you're a pussified left-leaning scoured-head liberal turnip doesn't count.

 

[AntonToo]

Dude, all they did was agree to hear the case. You want Trump to be on trial but you don’t want him to have access to the courts. Can’t have it both ways.

So if the GOP installs partisan prosecutors to go after the next Democratic frontrunner, the courts might interfere with their election driven timetable also?

Actually they refused when they were asked by Jack Smith to settle presidential immunity claims back in Dec, 135 days ago.

They now sudenly raise their hand - STOP EVERYTHING! Stop cases against Trump. We promise to have a hearing on this...in 2 months, followed by who-knows how long to deliver an actual ruling.

That sounds reasonable, good faith behavior by Supreme Court to you?

 

[progressive hunter]

Actually they refused when they were asked by Jack Smith to settle presidential immunity claims back in Dec, 135 days ago.

They now sudenly raise their hand - STOP EVERYTHING! Stop cases against Trump. We promise to have a hearing on this...in 2 months, followed by who-knows how long to deliver an actual ruling.

That sounds reasonable, good faith behavior by Supreme Court to you?

yes it does,,