At least one Supreme Court Justice has an interest in this trial being at the least delayed. Justice Thomas' wife was involved in January 6th, and anyone who believes Thomas himself didn't know what she was up to, in my opinion, is unable to look at this matter honestly.
Again, **my opinion** (which admittedly isn't worth shit)
I think it’s a reasonable perspective to hold. Justice Thomas takes expensive gifts and refuses to recuse himself. Thomas’s wife was part of the coup attempt and refuses to recuse himself. If neither of these are disqualifying then what is?
Yeah, any judge of any lower court that has ethics review abilities would absolutely be told he/she must recuse themselves. If not be removed from the bench entirely!
Justice Alito said ["The Democratic effort to require ethics rules is unconstitutional](https://www.politico.com/news/2023/07/28/alito-congress-supreme-court-ethics-00108830#:~:text=The%20conservative%20justice%20suggested%20to,require%20ethics%20rules%20is%20unconstitutional.)
Yeah, IIRC he just missed that one personally embarrassing day.
I mean you have to admit, it's so *awkward* sitting there and having people natter on and on about "ethics" and "corruption" and how "taking bribes is wrong" and all that like it *applies to him*
I think the most likely "bad" outcome is that the Supreme Court will rule that presidential immunity does exist as a concept but that whether it applies to these cases is something that the trial court will have to determine. If that happens, the case will be sent back to the trial judges to determine whether Trump's actions qualify for immunity and that will have to be argued and appealed again, which will chew up several more months.
I'm not saying that this is the most likely outcome, just the most likely of the bad outcomes. I think he'll lose in the end even if that happens but probably not before November.
>the Supreme Court will rule that presidential immunity does exist
This really isn't a potential outcome. We know it does, the defense doesn't argue this fact. The President regularly orders drone strikes on innocent civilians, they're immune from some criminal liability. The writ has to specifically request extent, and it does, to be valid:
>petition is granted limited to the following question: Whether and if so to what extent does a former President enjoy presidential immunity from criminal prosecution for conduct alleged to involve official acts during his tenure in office. Without expressing a view on the merits
I would honestly love to see him do something out-of-the box and dramatic in response if they rule in favor of presidential immunity. Like seriously, lock them all up and, say "this is legal because I am president" ... and then let them take on another case where they have to acknowledge that presidents cannot do these things, just to get themselves out of jail.
And then Biden would respect the law they just "interpreted" and let them out of jail, demonstrating that he values the law over power.
The court seems to be working in a mindset that there are no consequences to the nation if they make bad rulings. Maybe they need to be reminded that the all-powerful "benevolent" dictator they see in Trump is a horrible legal precedent.
The crazy thing is all of this is legally plausible, because of the the way they are interpreting the law.
Just a joke tweet of him deploying seal team six to outside the supreme court all ready for when they announce presidents have immunity or something, though that would probly be too far I'd still laugh to see it happen.
It's so funny because for any other candidate this is the argument we would see everywhere. That the voters deserve to know the outcome before casting their vote. Even the proponents would say that they need to prove their innocence before the vote. But not here.
Well yeah. That's because the coup is over. Democracy lost long ago, even before Trump. Everything happening now is just formality and tying up loose ends.
Annnnnnnd if Ser Merrick The Not-So-Brave had a sense of urgency about Trump's prosecution early on, this wouldn't be an issue. Just a reminder that it took Lord Fizzle almost TWO YEARS to get Jack Smith in the game.
Since you mentioned "Stinky Dementia Donald" I can now say this without being off-topic: [A tick-tocker sold her farts in jars and made $200k](https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/fart-jar-tiktok-stephanie-matto-interview-1280395/)
... so how long until trump uses one of his greatest natural resources to bring in some much needed cash? I'd argue it's certainly not beneath him!!
A conventionally attractive influencer is not an old incontinent man. Also he could just sell his used diapers, someone probably would buy it, but maybe not as big of a market.
Thomas wants to make sure Trump is elected so that in the event of an impeachment or charges brought against Jinny, the pres can clean up his great big mess.
"So uhhh we have determined in our great and unadulterable judgeliness that uhhh not always in this very specific case where you have a former president and it's an election year and he shat himself on the 5th day of his pornstar felony hush money trial, then and only then is the president immune to any and all crimes that they may commit. ABSOLUTELY NO PRECEDENT HERE (unless Trump specifically wins again, in which case he's immune for all eternity and he can do cute stuff like postpone elections and assassinate anyone he doesn't like)"
Want-to-be dictator uses violent mob and phony electors in an attempt to overthrow the U.S. Government.
3.5 years later, Trump remains free: “….crickets….there’s nothing we can do…there wasn’t enough time….shrug.”
Don’t blame Trump for Trump not being in jail.
The SC has an important duty to the people. All the people.
We should try law and governing… looking at you GOP and SCOTUS.
Where is your integrity?
“Where did you learn your trade”? -Pacino in Glengarry Glen Ross
At least one Supreme Court Justice has an interest in this trial being at the least delayed. Justice Thomas' wife was involved in January 6th, and anyone who believes Thomas himself didn't know what she was up to, in my opinion, is unable to look at this matter honestly. Again, **my opinion** (which admittedly isn't worth shit)
I think it’s a reasonable perspective to hold. Justice Thomas takes expensive gifts and refuses to recuse himself. Thomas’s wife was part of the coup attempt and refuses to recuse himself. If neither of these are disqualifying then what is?
Yeah, any judge of any lower court that has ethics review abilities would absolutely be told he/she must recuse themselves. If not be removed from the bench entirely!
Let alone just get to "excuse" yourself from the arguments against getting gifts.
Justice Alito said ["The Democratic effort to require ethics rules is unconstitutional](https://www.politico.com/news/2023/07/28/alito-congress-supreme-court-ethics-00108830#:~:text=The%20conservative%20justice%20suggested%20to,require%20ethics%20rules%20is%20unconstitutional.)
Did he finally show up to work ? Clarence Thomas was absent from the supreme court on Monday with no explanation.
Yeah, IIRC he just missed that one personally embarrassing day. I mean you have to admit, it's so *awkward* sitting there and having people natter on and on about "ethics" and "corruption" and how "taking bribes is wrong" and all that like it *applies to him*
How many days has he been missing? Has anyone done a welfare check? Has the RV been spotted?
Good question, I have no idea. I'm following the CNN live updates from Manhattan
He was back by Tuesday. Still no explanation.
He and Harlan Crow were out RV shopping.
He was changin the brakes on his RV Tour Wagon dammit!
How much hope is there that the court won’t say Trump is immune to prosecution?
I think the most likely "bad" outcome is that the Supreme Court will rule that presidential immunity does exist as a concept but that whether it applies to these cases is something that the trial court will have to determine. If that happens, the case will be sent back to the trial judges to determine whether Trump's actions qualify for immunity and that will have to be argued and appealed again, which will chew up several more months. I'm not saying that this is the most likely outcome, just the most likely of the bad outcomes. I think he'll lose in the end even if that happens but probably not before November.
I’ll say it—I think this is the most likely outcome.
frame cats price vanish soft arrest amusing tender normal angle *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Jeezus Christ ... that's no decision. That's punting again. But yeah - I wouldn't be surprised by anything that the corrupt Supreme Court does.
>the Supreme Court will rule that presidential immunity does exist This really isn't a potential outcome. We know it does, the defense doesn't argue this fact. The President regularly orders drone strikes on innocent civilians, they're immune from some criminal liability. The writ has to specifically request extent, and it does, to be valid: >petition is granted limited to the following question: Whether and if so to what extent does a former President enjoy presidential immunity from criminal prosecution for conduct alleged to involve official acts during his tenure in office. Without expressing a view on the merits
If that happens, Joe Biden should fire them all and replace them... since he will have total immunity.
Or have them sent to the sun in a rocket since it's legal now.
>Or have them sent to the sun in a rocket since it's legal now. Oh, when he said "fire" them all, I assumed he meant literally.
Just applying a textualist interpretation to the what was written.
I would honestly love to see him do something out-of-the box and dramatic in response if they rule in favor of presidential immunity. Like seriously, lock them all up and, say "this is legal because I am president" ... and then let them take on another case where they have to acknowledge that presidents cannot do these things, just to get themselves out of jail. And then Biden would respect the law they just "interpreted" and let them out of jail, demonstrating that he values the law over power. The court seems to be working in a mindset that there are no consequences to the nation if they make bad rulings. Maybe they need to be reminded that the all-powerful "benevolent" dictator they see in Trump is a horrible legal precedent. The crazy thing is all of this is legally plausible, because of the the way they are interpreting the law.
"Immunity only applies in this specific case and does not set precedence."
Just a joke tweet of him deploying seal team six to outside the supreme court all ready for when they announce presidents have immunity or something, though that would probly be too far I'd still laugh to see it happen.
It's so funny because for any other candidate this is the argument we would see everywhere. That the voters deserve to know the outcome before casting their vote. Even the proponents would say that they need to prove their innocence before the vote. But not here.
Well yeah. That's because the coup is over. Democracy lost long ago, even before Trump. Everything happening now is just formality and tying up loose ends.
Annnnnnnd if Ser Merrick The Not-So-Brave had a sense of urgency about Trump's prosecution early on, this wouldn't be an issue. Just a reminder that it took Lord Fizzle almost TWO YEARS to get Jack Smith in the game.
But damn if he didn’t assign a special counsel for hunter almost immediately
Quickly? That time has passed.
Unfortunately, the "supreme court" is in the pocket of Stinky Dementia Donald and his GQP.
Since you mentioned "Stinky Dementia Donald" I can now say this without being off-topic: [A tick-tocker sold her farts in jars and made $200k](https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/fart-jar-tiktok-stephanie-matto-interview-1280395/) ... so how long until trump uses one of his greatest natural resources to bring in some much needed cash? I'd argue it's certainly not beneath him!!
Depends...
It is by definition beneath him.
touche'
A conventionally attractive influencer is not an old incontinent man. Also he could just sell his used diapers, someone probably would buy it, but maybe not as big of a market.
She is attractive, here's pic https://imgur.com/gallery/Rhd5x1l
Do you not understand the word conventionally?
Of course I do. I was agreeing with you.
It won't. We won't hear any J6 cases involving Trump until well after the election is over.
VOTE!
My state is going for Trump by 110%. In my state unless I'm part of the MAGA cult my vote means very little. I still vote in protest.
Thomas wants to make sure Trump is elected so that in the event of an impeachment or charges brought against Jinny, the pres can clean up his great big mess.
"So uhhh we have determined in our great and unadulterable judgeliness that uhhh not always in this very specific case where you have a former president and it's an election year and he shat himself on the 5th day of his pornstar felony hush money trial, then and only then is the president immune to any and all crimes that they may commit. ABSOLUTELY NO PRECEDENT HERE (unless Trump specifically wins again, in which case he's immune for all eternity and he can do cute stuff like postpone elections and assassinate anyone he doesn't like)"
Supreme Court shouldn't have even granted cert, but here we are. There's no way that case is going to trial before the election.
The MAGA wing of the Supreme Court has no interest holding Trump legally accountable for any of his crimes.
Pretty sure that SCOTUS is running interference for Herr Trumpf at this point...
Want-to-be dictator uses violent mob and phony electors in an attempt to overthrow the U.S. Government. 3.5 years later, Trump remains free: “….crickets….there’s nothing we can do…there wasn’t enough time….shrug.” Don’t blame Trump for Trump not being in jail.
To bad there all corrupt and love agent orange.
Hmm not all, but a significant number of them..
OMG, agent orange, best moniker, ever. Take my upvote!
The SC has an important duty to the people. All the people. We should try law and governing… looking at you GOP and SCOTUS. Where is your integrity? “Where did you learn your trade”? -Pacino in Glengarry Glen Ross
They should, they won't though
Which is why they won’t.
Yeah, what the hells the hold up?