Nah. They have what they want. They have pointedly ruled against Trump every single time he’s appealed to them so far. I don’t expect anything different the next time.
Trump's claim of Cosmic Eternal Presidential Immunity is hopelessly idiotic. Which probably means at least a few members of SCOTUS will be entirely in favor of it and will even complain that it didn't go far enough towards making Trump the equivalent of Zeus Almighty or the Bible's Lord of Hosts. But I can at least see why SCOTUS wants to wait for the appeals court decision/s -- it allows them to distance themselves a bit from the immediate politics of any decision they will have to make, and the delay may only amount to a few weeks or a month. Not ideal, and in my view not really necessary either -- but not the end of the world or any sign that the majority will side with Trump's crazed claim. Of course, if they DO rule in his favor, the republic is done for.
If they rule in his favor, Biden should immediately have Trump taken into custody by the military, transferred to Gitmo, tried for treason before a military tribunal, and executed. All in the name of National Security.
The Republicans don't like it, they can impeach him, and, if they succeed, we go into 2024 with President Harris and Vice President Buttigieg.
If they decide that Presidents do indeed have the divine right of kings, OHJB should just have the PAB beheaded in the town square and be done with it.
Biden could declare himself King and pass the newly established realm along to Hunter upon his passing at the age of 103. Republicans need to think this one over before they advocate any of Donald's crazy demands.
Biden's attorneys should submit an amicus brief, stating how interested they were in knowing if Presidential immunity is a 'thing', in the context of it applying to Biden, currently in office. It'll display to the court the stupidity of the argument, inasmuch as it will be a green light for Joe to do whatever he wants, including having Trump detained at Guantanamo, which, would be legal if Presidential immunity was a 'thing.'
I was thinking the same thing. A shot across the bow so to speak.
“ Hey guys, just checking in, I wanted to be sure that when you rule in favor of presidential immunity that it’s will apply to me immediately… I have a few ideas I want to kick around
While I appreciate the article, I think it implies more sinister motives than and/or disastrous outcomes than is warranted.
As I previously posted on Saturday morning (see Note below), the denial of the SCO’s cert petition could be a *good* thing, if it means that SCOTUS doesn’t want to touch TFG’s bogus immunity and double jeopardy claims with a 10 foot pole, because they are SO BAD, y’all.
When the 3-judge DC appellate panel denies TFG’s defenses, it can lift the stay in Judge Chutkan’s court to allow the case to proceed to trial.
And while TFG can HEREBY DEMAND that the full DC COA hear the case en banc, they can quickly reject the request. Likewise, SCOTUS can deny TFG’s inevitable petition for writ of certiorari, and do so quickly. Basically, TFG is NOT necessarily entitled to SCOTUS review of of the panel’s decision, particularly if it well-reasoned, at least at this stage.
Yes. I think they're trying to manage their image through a difficult and even crazy situation. This may strike many of us as ironic since they have already earned deep opprobrium for their straight-up ideological decisions in recent years, as in the Dobbs case. I'm not sure they have much integrity left to lose, though no doubt the Court's members don't see things that way.
I think you've called it precisely. The SCOTUS is in a no-win situation here, as half the country will be outraged no matter which way they rule. By letting the DC COA rule and then declining to review, they keep their hands clean.
And again, TFG’s bogus defenses are being considered at the Motion to Dismiss stage, which means all allegations in the indictment MUST be accepted as true. No matter how hard TFG’s attorneys try to shoe-horn the allegations into “official acts” a la Nixon v Fitzgerald - seriously, they used that phrase SO MANY TIMES in their opening appellate brief - it doesn’t work. Particularly after Blassingame (decided by a different DC appellate panel on 12/1) distinguished Fitzgerald, on the grounds that TFG’s actions around J6 were not official Presidential acts, but were the actions of a political candidate engaging in election interference.
In other words, imagine if Hillary had done all this shit after the 2016 election.
See also my Note on TFG’s opening appellate brief.
Bluesky lawyers (the real kind) were speculating that they want the DC circuit ruling of Are You Fucking Kidding Me for cover when they also rule AYFKM
"Members of the Court, I ask you, has any other President ever had his name splayed across the front of a HUGE skyscraper in a major American city? No? Then I rest my case." - Diaper Don's lawyers
Speaking of deranged, Diaper Donnie’s annual Christmas message was full of the usual holiday cheer.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/donald-trump-rot-in-hell-truth-social-christmas_n_658a5753e4b03e698a141df3
The best court money can buy is good and bought.
yeah but are the owners sick of the clown and trying to get rid of him or not?
Nah. They have what they want. They have pointedly ruled against Trump every single time he’s appealed to them so far. I don’t expect anything different the next time.
Now that they've got their lifetime appointments, I'm sure they're all thinking more about their legacies than being Trump's lackies.
And, looking how Clarence Thomas is going to be remembered in history is certainly a sobering thought.
I'm a fan of saying Horseshit, personally. The gutteral H sounds feels good when swearing. Try it! Horseshit.
SC assholes
So SCOTUS said, "Nope"
They just said nope to expediting it.
Trump's claim of Cosmic Eternal Presidential Immunity is hopelessly idiotic. Which probably means at least a few members of SCOTUS will be entirely in favor of it and will even complain that it didn't go far enough towards making Trump the equivalent of Zeus Almighty or the Bible's Lord of Hosts. But I can at least see why SCOTUS wants to wait for the appeals court decision/s -- it allows them to distance themselves a bit from the immediate politics of any decision they will have to make, and the delay may only amount to a few weeks or a month. Not ideal, and in my view not really necessary either -- but not the end of the world or any sign that the majority will side with Trump's crazed claim. Of course, if they DO rule in his favor, the republic is done for.
If they rule in his favor, Biden should immediately have Trump taken into custody by the military, transferred to Gitmo, tried for treason before a military tribunal, and executed. All in the name of National Security.
The Republicans don't like it, they can impeach him, and, if they succeed, we go into 2024 with President Harris and Vice President Buttigieg.
If they decide that Presidents do indeed have the divine right of kings, OHJB should just have the PAB beheaded in the town square and be done with it.
Biden could declare himself King and pass the newly established realm along to Hunter upon his passing at the age of 103. Republicans need to think this one over before they advocate any of Donald's crazy demands.
Well if true Biden and he could engage in gang warfare and face no consequences!
Biden's attorneys should submit an amicus brief, stating how interested they were in knowing if Presidential immunity is a 'thing', in the context of it applying to Biden, currently in office. It'll display to the court the stupidity of the argument, inasmuch as it will be a green light for Joe to do whatever he wants, including having Trump detained at Guantanamo, which, would be legal if Presidential immunity was a 'thing.'
I was thinking the same thing. A shot across the bow so to speak.
“ Hey guys, just checking in, I wanted to be sure that when you rule in favor of presidential immunity that it’s will apply to me immediately… I have a few ideas I want to kick around
Thanks in advance
Yours
Dark Brandon
(This is why no Repug with actual power is acting like this is serious)
From a TV promo: "The year 2024 is guaranteed to give you an election!"
If it lasts more than two and a half months....
"who ever heard of an American citizen declaring they have the divine right to commit crimes with complete immunity?"
`
Old people.
Old people remember Nixon saying, "If the President does it, it is not illegal."
Yeah, but he needed a pardon sooo....paradox?
From the "Where are they now?" department
I'm right here.
Nixon is gone.
Indeed, he DID say that.
"mom, what is cynicism?"
Yes, there would be a 6-3 liberal majority on SCOTUS if email lady had won, but she didn’t inspire meeeee.
Didn't come to my state and shake my hand personally!
Or at least only a 5-4 con majority if RBG lady had strategically retired.
I got extra ham, I'll email you some...
Calling this "Supreme" Court The Supremes is disrespectful to Florence Ballard, to Mary Wilson and to Diana Ross.
While I appreciate the article, I think it implies more sinister motives than and/or disastrous outcomes than is warranted.
As I previously posted on Saturday morning (see Note below), the denial of the SCO’s cert petition could be a *good* thing, if it means that SCOTUS doesn’t want to touch TFG’s bogus immunity and double jeopardy claims with a 10 foot pole, because they are SO BAD, y’all.
When the 3-judge DC appellate panel denies TFG’s defenses, it can lift the stay in Judge Chutkan’s court to allow the case to proceed to trial.
And while TFG can HEREBY DEMAND that the full DC COA hear the case en banc, they can quickly reject the request. Likewise, SCOTUS can deny TFG’s inevitable petition for writ of certiorari, and do so quickly. Basically, TFG is NOT necessarily entitled to SCOTUS review of of the panel’s decision, particularly if it well-reasoned, at least at this stage.
https://substack.com/@2cats2furious/note/c-45937215?utm_source=notes-share-action&r=2knok4
Yes. I think they're trying to manage their image through a difficult and even crazy situation. This may strike many of us as ironic since they have already earned deep opprobrium for their straight-up ideological decisions in recent years, as in the Dobbs case. I'm not sure they have much integrity left to lose, though no doubt the Court's members don't see things that way.
Whatever the worst possible outcome is what I'm expecting.
I think you've called it precisely. The SCOTUS is in a no-win situation here, as half the country will be outraged no matter which way they rule. By letting the DC COA rule and then declining to review, they keep their hands clean.
I think it's more like 75%-25%, but the minority keeps talking about using their guns if anyone upsets them.
This exactly
💯
Like Pontius Pilate.
Ah yes, the inventor of Pilates. Too bad he did that other thing that got him a bit more bad press.
/s
🤭
As I recall, Pilate opted out of making any decision, saying "it's an internal matter and doesn't involve Rome, so let them handle it."
Nah, he had more integrity.
"I'm not getting my fingerprints on THIS train wreck!"
https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/71879be9-0ab2-41a8-8218-db70eb88a75e
Ayup.
And again, TFG’s bogus defenses are being considered at the Motion to Dismiss stage, which means all allegations in the indictment MUST be accepted as true. No matter how hard TFG’s attorneys try to shoe-horn the allegations into “official acts” a la Nixon v Fitzgerald - seriously, they used that phrase SO MANY TIMES in their opening appellate brief - it doesn’t work. Particularly after Blassingame (decided by a different DC appellate panel on 12/1) distinguished Fitzgerald, on the grounds that TFG’s actions around J6 were not official Presidential acts, but were the actions of a political candidate engaging in election interference.
In other words, imagine if Hillary had done all this shit after the 2016 election.
See also my Note on TFG’s opening appellate brief.
https://substack.com/@2cats2furious/note/c-46016356?utm_source=notes-share-action&r=2knok4
Bluesky lawyers (the real kind) were speculating that they want the DC circuit ruling of Are You Fucking Kidding Me for cover when they also rule AYFKM
They may. SCOTUS can also just deny TFG’s inevitable cert petition after the DC COA ruling, and allow the case to go to trial.
TFG is not necessarily entitled to SCOTUS review, just because he made a novel (and terrible) claim of absolute Presidential immunity.
"Members of the Court, I ask you, has any other President ever had his name splayed across the front of a HUGE skyscraper in a major American city? No? Then I rest my case." - Diaper Don's lawyers
Your case isn't resting ... it's dead. https://i0.wp.com/thinkremote.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Ford-Motor-Company-scaled.jpg?fit=2560%2C1706&ssl=1
Pining for the Fjords, as it were.
OT; Is Kanye back on his meds? https://www.theguardian.com/music/2023/dec/26/kanye-west-apologises-to-jewish-community-for-2022-antisemitic-remarks
Adidas, please come back!
Fuck Kanye and whatever new meds he is on.
Didn't he say something else anti-Semitic just three or four days ago?
Probably.
I just hope that the man is getting some of the help he so damned desperately needs.