Latest Breaking News

Kablooie

(18,995 posts)

74. I'll bet the Justices don't want Trump tried before the election and will work towards that end.

Fri Dec 22, 2023, 09:15 PM

Dec 2023

It would create too many complications with him having to go to trials instead of campaigning and if he was ordered to jail, who knows what would happen.
All of this would probably have to be resolved by the Supreme court and they don't want to have to decide these things.

They will do everything they can to make sure Trump can run and run without any legal entanglements.

Let's just hope to god that he doesn't win.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

98 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Supreme Court won't fast-track ruling on Trump's claim of immunity [View all] aggiesal Dec 2023 OP

Kissing Trump's ass again. sinkingfeeling Dec 2023 #1

Translate this for me like I am 5 years old. MOMFUDSKI Dec 2023 #2

Yes it helps the clown. It's delay, delay, delay ... aggiesal Dec 2023 #5

I tend to agree, but ... Kennah Dec 2023 #27

As soon as it looks like its going to run into the next election LiberalLovinLug Dec 2023 #97

CNN legal analysts saying it makes Smith's March date for trial all but impossible. Case has to go to Silent Type Dec 2023 #13

This means that the claudette Dec 2023 #45

Possibly not.. getagrip_already Dec 2023 #55

So we now know bluestarone Dec 2023 #3

My reading of the reports liberalgunwilltravel Dec 2023 #36

Over my head. Basic LA Dec 2023 #4

Smith wanted fast-track, Pendejo45 requested delay ... aggiesal Dec 2023 #6

Great summation. Thanks! Basic LA Dec 2023 #8

I think Smith also asked the appeal court to fast-track it, so we will see what happens. JohnSJ Dec 2023 #12

I don't think it's all gloom and doom... agingdem Dec 2023 #20

I hope you are right. This one should be a slam dunk. No one is above the law. JohnSJ Dec 2023 #22

I'm thinking the SC is really skittish about this one... agingdem Dec 2023 #26

I agree with that one. PlutosHeart Dec 2023 #28

I would rather this three quarters bent SC do nothing agingdem Dec 2023 #47

Could be trying to avoid the death threats that inevitability come. rubbersole Dec 2023 #34

Afraid to make precedent, not afraid to toss others' precedent right out the window padah513 Dec 2023 #66

that's true.. agingdem Dec 2023 #69

So, if any prez is totally immune, Joe could have the SS shoot the TFG (or do it himself) and get of scott-free, right? machoneman Dec 2023 #80

Probably... agingdem Dec 2023 #82

They don't care about their approval rating SouthernDem4ever Dec 2023 #84

I'm pretty sure Chief Justice Roberts cares about agingdem Dec 2023 #95

It would be nice if this were true SouthernDem4ever Dec 2023 #98

Agree. sheshe2 Dec 2023 #76

Everything I've seen shows that Jack Smith (the Special Counsel - SC) anticipates everything erronis Dec 2023 #49

Hope you're right. elleng Dec 2023 #67

He did. Igel Dec 2023 #83

not a surprise. Anyone who thinks this SC will NOT overturn the Colorado SC removing trump from the ballot JohnSJ Dec 2023 #7

Oh yea the bastards WILL fast track that. bluestarone Dec 2023 #15

Last hope we have is 2024. We are hanging by a thread. JohnSJ Dec 2023 #18

IF they get involved with the Colorado SC decision, then bluestarone Dec 2023 #19

Then get ready to be disappointed - because both are likely to happen in the normal course of events FBaggins Dec 2023 #30

TY for this. (and i know you're 100% correct) It just blows me away bluestarone Dec 2023 #38

Why would they comment? former9thward Dec 2023 #40

You actually believe they agreed? bluestarone Dec 2023 #44

Yes. former9thward Dec 2023 #46

My question. bluestarone Dec 2023 #48

That has never been their practice. former9thward Dec 2023 #52

Well, I do have a hard time believing there was no dessent bluestarone Dec 2023 #54

That's not how it works. AkFemDem Dec 2023 #58

Because they don't need to, that's why. Igel Dec 2023 #86

TY! I was upset, like most here. I'm always thankful for all you smart posters here. bluestarone Dec 2023 #91

I think they will not, and i think this is them throwing donald a bone quakerboy Dec 2023 #57

There are so many cases and appeals EndlessWire Dec 2023 #71

No, these two cases are fundamentally different. Igel Dec 2023 #87

I think the US constitution gives states the whole responsibility and power to operate .......... jaxexpat Dec 2023 #78

They may simply be taking the easy way out. Let the voters decide! machoneman Dec 2023 #81

So letting Trump delay just as Trump wanted. Freethinker65 Dec 2023 #9

Then they don't claudette Dec 2023 #42

This is what makes 6-3 so onerous...they can "rule" by withholding cert. CincyDem Dec 2023 #10

Not really FBaggins Dec 2023 #32

Agree. Unfortunately, their cert dissent won't get a hearing. CincyDem Dec 2023 #56

Maybe they're afraid of death threats too... diva77 Dec 2023 #11

All any Republican knows how BlueKota Dec 2023 #14

It's really is pathetic that SCOTUS won't expedite this motion. iluvtennis Dec 2023 #16

I tend to think that it may actually be faster this way. Igel Dec 2023 #88

Interesting to know where some of the Supremes will be flown to for their holiday vacations Scalded Nun Dec 2023 #17

This! chowder66 Dec 2023 #21

I have to ask here bluestarone Dec 2023 #23

Maybe they agreed Polybius Dec 2023 #25

SCOTUS can't even hammer home a no-brainer gimme bucolic_frolic Dec 2023 #24

How much did this cost? Hermit-The-Prog Dec 2023 #29

Prepaid. rubbersole Dec 2023 #35

Quelle Surprise. n/t rambler_american Dec 2023 #31

Supreme Court is pay to play. So what bribes did they get for this? Irish_Dem Dec 2023 #33

Santa was generous this year dalton99a Dec 2023 #39

Probably the usual Wash DC bribes. Irish_Dem Dec 2023 #62

Is that why there was no dissent ? MichMan Dec 2023 #79

Maybe some inside baseball politics, agendas and agreements. Irish_Dem Dec 2023 #85

It appeared that you were accusing Justices Kagan, Sotomayor and Jackson of accepting bribes MichMan Dec 2023 #89

This is absurd. Irish_Dem Dec 2023 #92

I thought so too MichMan Dec 2023 #93

that has been his mo most of his adult life . outspend using other ppls money delay delay delay and out live . hes 77 AllaN01Bear Dec 2023 #37

And there you have it claudette Dec 2023 #41

The Supreme Court hated Demnh2fl Dec 2023 #43

It's possible SCrOTUS merely punted the decision. pfitz59 Dec 2023 #50

Yeah, hopefully the process is: forgotmylogin Dec 2023 #64

There is not enough tomato juice in the world FalloutShelter Dec 2023 #51

Looks like Slappy Thomas is getting a new motor home.... Comfortably_Numb Dec 2023 #53

The whole thing (I am immune but noone else is) was a Trump ploy. GreenWave Dec 2023 #59

Just fucking die already. Solve problems for once. OverBurn Dec 2023 #60

What To Expect? MayReasonRule Dec 2023 #61

Good. Once again SCOTUS is ruling in favor of proper due process, exactly what we want Trump to be held to. CaptainTruth Dec 2023 #63

NO dissents? None? THAT'S surprising. live love laugh Dec 2023 #65

Why? Igel Dec 2023 #90

Seems like who ever Тяцмp is upset with gets death threats KS Toronado Dec 2023 #68

Yeah, they're just too busy... surfered Dec 2023 #70

Not surprising since the DC Appeals court has fast-tracked Trump's appeal Deminpenn Dec 2023 #72

Exactly. This isn't as bad as it seems. Novara Dec 2023 #73

Supreme Court brief states Jack Smith does not have legal standing. RetiredFF Dec 2023 #96

I'll bet the Justices don't want Trump tried before the election and will work towards that end. Kablooie Dec 2023 #74

Disappointing but I wonder intheflow Dec 2023 #75

Obstruction case is a bigger concern duckworth969 Dec 2023 #77

All because of one thing The Grand Illuminist Dec 2023 #94