Current Events > Trump Trials General Part 23

(+) Yeah! (+)

We press on.

Bad times

This day sucked. Trump did better than expected at a debate by not sucking as much as expected (though apparently Biden is polling better). Also, this Supreme Court has made two or three shity decisions that have their own threads.

It feels like the bad part of the election is starting now. Or at least were in a bad news cycle.

I feel genuinely in fear for the future of the country. Strong chances it falls into the hands of right wing theocrats this november and they cement a Supreme Court majority lasting the next several generations

LearntoRead posted...

It feels like the bad part of the election is starting now. Or at least were in a bad news cycle.

This is the harrowing end of Act 2. Act 3 is either going to be Return of the Jedi or Revenge of the Sith.

Tagging

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/f/fa115f9b.jpg

Updates:

• SCOTUS narrowed the scope of the obstruction of an official proceeding charge as it relates to January 6th, so we're probably going to have a lot of appeals and re-sentencings.
• SCOTUS is expected to release the ruling on Trump's absolute immunity appeal on Monday July 1st.
• Georgia RICO case: Appeals process for the ruling on Fani Willis' disqualification is ongoing
• January 6th case: On hold, pending the immunity ruling from SCOTUS on Monday.
• Classified documents case: Pre-trail motions still ongoing. At some point, Judge Cannon was asked to recuse herself from the case by two other judges, but she refused.
• Bankruptcy creditors are still combing through Rudy Giuliani's finances
• Sidney Powell settled a defamation lawsuit brought by an ex-Dominion employee

def giving him immunity sad shit hole we live in

Tag.

https://twitter.com/Z_Everson/status/1806754484942504004

https://twitter.com/kyledcheney/status/1806758360416465267

To prison Steve Bannon shall go on Monday

CableZL posted...

https://twitter.com/kyledcheney/status/1806758360416465267

To prison Steve Bannon shall go on Monday

Some good news today. Have fun Steve. See you in 4 months.

At least were less than 2 weeks away from Sentencing date. I know many are doubtful it will be a meaningful punishment but its the closest thing to something to look forward to right now.

In what way did they narrow the scope?

Cory898 posted...

At least were less than 2 weeks away from Sentencing date. I know many are doubtful it will be a meaningful punishment but its the closest thing to something to look forward to right now.

Regardless it's going to piss fat fuck and the chuds off. I know it's not going to be a prison sentence but I'm happy to finally see him get punished.

My hope, House arrest for the next 3 years
My dread, An easily paid fine and some restrictions he'll violate with impunity

I don't think Trump gets immunity. That's why we're getting some shitty decisions from yesterday and today; they had to placate the Supreme Excrement Golems Thomas and Alito because the others are going to rule against Trump on Monday.

I don't trust Goursh, Kavanaugh, or Barrett one bit, but I would like to say they're at least smart enough to not jettison their power to the Fanta Fascist.

Im betting well get some vague compromise decision like the president has some immunity but isnt an all powerful entity that can do stuff like legally assassinate people running against him

But hopefully its a full blown fuck you to Trump and MAGA

DarkChozoGhost posted...

In what way did they narrow the scope?

They ruled that physically impeding the procedure (as the rioters did on Jan 6) does not qualify under the statute. It only counts if someone falsifies documents, etc.

As far as the Total Immunity claim goes, there is a way in which the Supreme Court doesn't give Trump immunity (because that is ludicrous) but still gives him what he wants. Which is time. By remanding it back to the lower court to have the judge hold hearings to rule on specifics. They could instruct Judge Chutkan to hold hearings to adjudicate whether or not any of the alleged acts might be possibly construed as presidential acts in any way. Thus pushing the trial even further down the line. Ultimately, the right-wing Justices are looking to give Trump as much time as possible to avoid consequences for his criminal acts.

King_Rial posted...

As far as the Total Immunity claim goes, there is a way in which the Supreme Court doesn't give Trump immunity (because that is ludicrous) but still gives him what he wants. Which is time. By remanding it back to the lower court to have the judge hold hearings to rule on specifics. They could instruct Judge Chutkan to hold hearings to adjudicate whether or not any of the alleged acts might be possibly construed as presidential acts in any way. Thus pushing the trial even further down the line. Ultimately, the right-wing Justices are looking to give Trump as much time as possible to avoid consequences for his criminal acts.

Lower courts already ruled against it. That's how it got here.

That's when we got the 'President can have his political adversaries assassinated as long as they don't get impeached and removed from office' quote.

I just have a feeling they will give him immunity but no other president just him

ClayGuida posted...

Lower courts already ruled against it. That's how it got here.

That's when we got the 'President can have his political adversaries assassinated as long as they don't get impeached and removed from office' quote.

I think you need to reread my post.

King_Rial posted...

I think you need to reread my post.

Trump's argument is absolute immunity, not selective immunity.

They've already decided what Presidents can and cannot get away with.

They've also argued that a President can declassify documents by just thinking about them, which is hilarious because they also don't want prosecutors looking through the documents that the President allegedly declassified in the first place.

ClayGuida posted...

Trump's argument is absolute immunity, not selective immunity.

That doesn't really matter to certain Justices. And to be clear, this is the analysis of a former federal prosecutor, not my own. This is an outcome that Glenn Kirschner believes they can take to further delay the trial.

King_Rial posted...

That doesn't really matter to certain Justices. And to be clear, this is the analysis of a former federal prosecutor, not my own. This is an outcome that Glenn Kirschner believes they can take to further delay the trial.

I mean, cool story and all, but we've already been there and done that.

They'll somehow write a decision that says "no, presidents don't have total immunity, but Trump's actions on Jan 6 were fine because reasons"

Euripides posted...

They'll somehow write a decision that says "no, presidents don't have total immunity, but Trump's actions on Jan 6 were fine because reasons"

It also covers the documents case too.

Euripides posted...

They'll somehow write a decision that says "no, presidents don't have total immunity, but Trump's actions on Jan 6 were fine because reasons"

I'm definitely pessimistic but I think ultimately there's no benefit for even the conservative judges to run cover for him that way.

Anteaterking posted...

I'm definitely pessimistic but I think ultimately there's no benefit for even the conservative judges to run cover for him that way.

They already did it with the obstruction ruling

At the end of the day, this was just a way to delay the case until after the election, which is what all Republicans want.

ClayGuida posted...

I mean, cool story and all, but we've already been there and done that.

No, we literally haven't. With all due respect, I will take a legal scholar's analysis over yours. Even if you don't like his, I think it is illogical to dismiss it without actual legal knowledge that can prove to ignore his position.

I'm just sharing with everyone a position that has been put forth. While you certainly don't have to take it as gospel (it wasn't presented that way anyway), at least take it under consideration.

Here is one of the times he breaks down what that would look like.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OEnvR1VrJaI

I hope this isn't the outcome, but it is a legal possiblity.

King_Rial posted...

No, we literally haven't. With all due respect, I will take a legal scholar's analysis over yours. Even if you don't like his, I think it is illogical to dismiss it without actual legal knowledge that can prove to ignore his position.

I'm just sharing with everyone a position that has been put forth. While you certainly don't have to take it as gospel (it wasn't presented that way anyway), at least take it under consideration.

Here is one of the times he breaks down what that would look like.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OEnvR1VrJaI

I hope this isn't the outcome, but it is a legal possiblity.

I mean assuming we know how conservative judges will decide cases is pretty asinine, so putting your faith behind a twitter or youtube star is kind of silly. Do you also put your portfolio in the hands of Jim Cramer?

I'm just saying putting this much stock into what someone says is pretty silly. Plenty of other 'legal experts' have said they'll do things different.

As we're on a message board, personally I think they'll just do the absolute worst thing, then tell us to fuck ourselves, like they've done with 90% of their decisions since 2021.

ClayGuida posted...

I mean assuming we know how conservative judges will decide cases is pretty asinine, so putting your faith behind a twitter or youtube star is kind of silly. Do you also put your portfolio in the hands of Jim Cramer?

I'm just saying putting this much stock into what someone says is pretty silly. Plenty of other 'legal experts' have said they'll do things different.

As we're on a message board, personally I think they'll just do the absolute worst thing, then tell us to fuck ourselves, like they've done with 90% of their decisions since 2021.

Here is a another article backing up that same line of thought.

https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/prepare-for-a-2024--mini-trial--in-trump-s-d.c.-prosecution

And this one as well.

https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2024/04/25/u-s-supreme-court-floats-return-to-trial-court-for-trump-in-presidential-immunity-case/

I'm just alerting people to this possibility. If they want to continue to delay this so he can get back in the White House and shut it all down, this is a move they can make.

I don't know why you are being both hostile and also dismissive. Again, I'm not telling you this is gospel. I already said this. And I can find you plenty of legal scholar's that said it is a POSSIBILITY. Letting folks know of a possibility is not the same thing as claiming it will happen, and I never presented it that way.

King_Rial posted...

I don't know why you are being both hostile and also dismissive. Again, I'm not telling you this is gospel. I already said this. And I can find you plenty of legal scholar's that said it is a POSSIBILITY. Letting folks know of a possibility is not the same thing as claiming it will happen, and I never presented it that way.

That's what doomposting is.

ClayGuida posted...

As we're on a message board, personally I think they'll just do the absolute worst thing, then tell us to fuck ourselves, like they've done with 90% of their decisions since 2021.

And because this is a message board you don't have to post as fast as possible to try to respond to someone to try to 'win' an argument.

Amakusa posted...

That's what doomposting is.

And because this is a message board you don't have to post as fast as possible to try to respond to someone to try to 'win' an argument.

What?

https://www.coloradopolitics.com/courts/10th-circuit-rejects-
tina-peters-request-to-intervene-in-mesa-county-prosecution/
article_a7bfa8be-3033-11ef-860d-cb6e475fd839.html

The federal appeals court based in Denver agreed on Friday that former Mesa County clerk Tina Peters had not shown why its intervention was warranted in her pending state-level prosecution related to election equipment tampering.

Peters, a Republican who unsuccessfully ran for secretary of state in 2022 and GOP party chair in 2023, is set to face criminal trial in July. The charges center on Peters' alleged actions as clerk to grant an unauthorized person access to an upgrade of the county's voting equipment, resulting in videos and confidential passwords later being posted online.

Tina Peters' trial is set to start on July 29th. Hopefully they don't let her delay it again.

Getting her ass in jail would be great too.

tag

with all the horriblness lately at least tomorrow will be a good day what with Steve bannon going to jail and it's not a club fed type jail either

tremain07 posted...

with all the horriblness lately at least tomorrow will be a good day what with Steve bannon going to jail and it's not a club fed type jail either

Tomorrow is also the day they give Trump his immunity, so we cant have anything nice.

Mearcstapa posted...

Tomorrow is also the day they give Trump his immunity, so we cant have anything nice.

If they really give Trump his immunity effectively killing every single case against him then that's the death blow to this country because if they can do that it's almost assured they'll bull shit a way to return him to the white house no matter what happens in November

Biden could literally then jail all republicans and trump and scotus cuz above the law baby

Steve Bannon must report to prison tomorrow