“Why is Trump getting special treatment from the Supreme Court?”

Why Is Trump Getting Special Treatment From the Supreme Court?”
“To understand how truly remarkable it is that the Supreme Court has agreed to consider former President Donald Trump’s demand for absolute immunity from criminal prosecution, it is necessary to have some sense of how the court treats other criminal defendants.”

“In recent years, the Roberts Court has shown greater and greater impatience with criminal defendants’ efforts to forestall punishment — even if the outcome would be cruel, needlessly painful or simply unjustified”

“Justice Neil Gorsuch set the tone for this approach in 2019, when he complained that legal challenges to the death penalty were often used to stall or even derail execution.”

“The Supreme Court has added more and more constraints upon prisoners’ ability to challenge constitutional errors. Gorsuch and Justice Clarence Thomas in particular have urged that the longstanding right to challenge state court convictions in federal court be effectively gutted”

“All this makes the Supreme Court’s decision to hear Trump’s appeal for absolute immunity from all criminal charges even more unusual, and troubling.

“Start with the weakness of Trump’s argument. There is absolutely no constitutional text, no precedent and no authority in the original debates over the Constitution’s ratification to support the idea for a former president’s absolute immunity. The argument advanced by Trump’s counsel is patently absurd.”

“The District of Columbia Court of Appeals rightly ridiculed it — and issued a comprehensive, tightly reasoned and unanimous opinion that presented no good cause for further review.”

“It is hard to see any legally sound reason why the Supreme Court should have decided to step in to hear Trump’s implausible and constitutionally destructive claim for absolute criminal immunity — especially when it has refused to hear so many other criminal defendants’ far more meritorious claims.”

https://www.politico.com/news/magazi...court-00144138

Taking up the case is contentious, but is it also questionable with the slow walking of a relatively straight forward legal proceeding, one which has the public’s interest, in a way that could ultimately effect the Presidential Election? Perhaps even be interpreted as an orchestrated form of election interference?

Is it suspicious given this Court is treating a presidential candidate, the candidate of the party that appointed six of the nine justices, with seemingly a special favor so as to materially aid his presidential campaign?

 

Members of the SC are politicians too

 

Q: Why Is Trump Getting Special Treatment From the Supreme Court?”
A: Because in 2016, people who voted for Sanders in the Dem. Primary DIDN'T vote for Clinton in November (most notably in PA, MI, WI) and facilitated Trump stacking the Court with reactionaries who would do his bidding.

 

But never as blatantly as they are now, when McConnell changed confirmation to a majority vote he changed the nature and integrity of the Supreme Court

 

I agree they seem to favor the former POTUS on his legal motions. I just hope they don't allow him to get away with what he did.

 

Every competent jurist in this country says Trump's motion will be denied.

The only reason SCOTUS wants to hear his case is to buy him time.

 

To answer your claims its first important to know, this is not a claim for absolute immunity from all criminal charges.
Even though the media loves to exaggerate everything when it comes to Trump.

His claim is immunity from criminal prosecution for a president's official acts. And we can argue all day about his acts when it comes to his phone calls to states about votes, but that isn't the issue at hand being decided by the SCOTUS.

For argument sake, lets say everything he is accused of about trying to get states to change votes is true or at least, thats how it appears.
Then when he leaves office, we take everything one party assumes he did, and prosecutes him as a civilian.

Are you under the assumption it stops with Trump? Do we now prosecute Obama for knowingly breaking every banking law we have to send a plane load of cash converted to untraceable Euros, Swiss francs, and other foreign currencies totaling over 1.8 billion over 19 days to Iran.

Are we going to prosecute Biden when he leaves office for ignoring the countries migration laws, or his recent found classified documents he stole as a Senator? You can kick and scream about it all day, but what stops Republicans from charging these former presidents once the gloves come off, setting precedents of charging presidents for their policy decisions after they leave office?

And using excuses of how much you despise Trump doesn't wash. These are precedent setting decisions which is why the SCOTUS is weighing in.

And now its getting worse and worse.

States taking the 14th amendment out of context to remove Trump from ballots.
A state DA and Judge fining Trump 400 million in fines charging bank fraud where no bank claims they were defrauded and no victims.
A corrupt DA in Georgia now being disqualified who has been caught knowingly lying under oath just to be the one to get Trump and has been found going to the WH to discuss Trumps case.

Democrats NEVER have any foresight for their actions. They will burn this country to the ground to get Trump.
Would you like a perfect example of Democrat foresight?

Using the Nuclear option in the Senate to sit state federal Obama judges with just 51 votes, instead of the 60 needed.
Why, because they couldn't get the Senate to sign off on these bias judges.
The result they were warned about if they did this?

3 Conservative judges appointed to the SCOTUS in the very next term with just 51 votes

And what does all this back and forth accomplish?

Nobody with two good brain cells will ever run for president. Who with any common sense would put their families through this idiocy?
Which is why we are saddled with the likes of Trump, Biden, Hillary, and Hailey.
Power hungry bias corrupt criminals who's only plan is to attack their opponents and use the office for their own power.

No new policies, nothing getting done.
Just a divided nation blaming each other at every turn.
And who's the loser?
American voters.

Thats why the SCOTUS is taking up these presidential claims to hopefully put down these attempts that are designed to interfere with elections.

 

Too much for one post, a lot of rambling

But for exchange purposes, you are missing the point, there was no reason for the SCOTUS to even take up the case, there is no precedent, nothing in the constitution, the Imperial Presidency is just a theory, which is the reason the appeals court quickly dismissed it even ridiculing it as a Hail Mary attempt. And if they felt it was something that had to be settled, something important, they should have done so back in December when Smith requested action

As far as the “no victims” argument, it doesn’t erase the fact he committed fraud, he broke the law, if you run a red light and no was hurt does that mean you don’t have to pay the penalty?

Reid purposely did not make the SCOTUS a majority vote, he recognized the consequences, it being the Court of last resort, he could have, but did not. The lower Justices are held to an ethics code, the SCOTUS is not, as we have seen. Mitch, who set several precedents when it comes to the highest court, changed the game, he purposely made it a partisan Court, which share as hell he is regretting now

And you go on and on and on too much to respond to everything

 

You have to parse the specific question that SCOTUS proposed to itself. The way they worded the question they will "answer", once they rule and send it down to Chutkan to act on, it opens the door to endless SCOTUS appeals as the ruling opens the door to an appeal for each and any act while in office. At least, that is what it appears to open up....

 

Exactly, hate to sound conspiratorial, but one would have to wonder if it was orchestrated from the offset, and not only that, but then you get into the appeals based upon a trial interfering with the election

 

Well, I guess in due time we will find out what was the majority's "reasoning" and "motives" were but, to me, it's unlikely that the Jan 6th case will be to a jury in the next decade given the question they proposed to themselves to actually answer. Crazy....but some people are above the law in America if you can afford the appeals.

 

Hes not, you are just getting tricked by rachel maddow.

 

Evidence shows you are incorrect, they are doing things for this candidate they wouldn’t do for another person, in fact, haven’t done under the reasoning the plaintiff was just trying to delay his case

 

Wouldn't it be easy to dispute rambling instead of facts?
I noticed you didn't do that

Yet the SCOTUS disagrees with you

Then I am sure you can name any president in history being charged after service, for crimes committed while in office.
I'll wait while you dig that up

Smith requested action from the SCOTUS while the case was on appeal.
The SCOTUS kicked his request to the curb because the appellant court had not ruled yet and all Smith was doing was trying to leap frog over the lower courts.

That excuse doesn't wash as civil court actions are not governed by criminal codes.

Not true. Both courts are held to the same accountability and Justices can be impeached.

Mitch did set a precedent when he told Democrats if they tried to use the nuclear option in the Senate to change the vote from 60 to 51, it would come back and bite them in the ass.

Hence, 3 conservative justices were appointed with 51 votes instead of 60.

 

Y'all hate it when a court, any court, protects Trump's rights. Don't you?

Should the Supreme Court treat Trump like he's guilty? Or, should they make sure his rights aren't trampled by a lynch mob style prosecution?

 

You have no evidence of the sort.

 

Really good post, good stuff.. Sad it will only fall in deaf ear when it's skimmed over by vindictive DNC lovers for no other reason than spitefulness, blind love of party and hatred of logic..

 

Or maybe the Court is the proper venue to adjudicate the issues?

 

They have never cared about the recourse of their actions. All they know is get Trump at all cost.
I believe we are at a point of no return where only 3 options are going to play out under Democrat rule.

1. The US will fall to foreign design
2. A revolution will take place to save and enforce the constitution
3. The US will split into two countries

There is no other option moving forward with Democrat rule in this country and the next election will determine the course.

 

They are now.

And that was one of the long term goals of the Federalist Society. Politicize the judiciary and stack it with judges.

 

Trump nation is, even now, “falling to foreign design”. Putin is pulling their beloved fuhrer’s strings.

There won’t be any revolution. Trump Nation disgraced itself on Jan 6th, and there won’t be anyone in the White House that will sit still while Trump tries to recruit another insurrection.

How do you expect that to come about.

 

Coming from the party defending the Biden family receiving 24 million from Russia, China, Kazakhstan, Romania, and Ukraine, with no product or service provided, and allowing 10 million illegals to invade the country, seems you aren't up on current events.

And remind us all again, who Putin publicly stated he supports? lol
And whats the new excuse coming from the same party that claims they were told to inject their lungs with Lysol?
Oh yeah, Putin is using reverse psychology.

You still running with that old debunked insurrection garbage?
Yeah, you should run with that.
In the mean time, the SCOTUS is going to slap down those idiotic claims from Colorado and the other Democrat ruled states today.
So we all expect the left to start with their attacks on the SCOTUS as soon as they make their public notice today, the only problem will be its unanimous decision.

 

Well if one takes current migration numbers in to fact point ONE is well underway.

As for point two, mildly that's actually underway, sadly the republic is losing ground to the fascist.

Point three, clearly has happened already. Politicians have divided us and we have very little power to control them anymore..

Grubmint has won..

 

Remind us again, who does your beloved fuhrer support? Over and over, again.

Relying and repeating one Putin quote, obviously made to punk his intended audience (as well as give Trump the pathetic to support him), only makes you look like your grasping for an excuse to support the Russians, as you do.

\Reverse psychology is easy on Trump nation, It’s not very smart and is always wishing for a strongman to tell them what to worship.

We are all familiar with your hero’s infatuation and promotion of quack cures. You need not remind us. We all saw it on live TV.

The insurrection was real, you supported it. Now you just repeat tired lies about it. Own your disgrace.

It will be hung around your necks anyway. The only people who are still trying to pretend that Jan 6th wasn’t an insurrection are Trump losers.

The rest of the world won’t forget the crime against American democracy that Trump’s mob and their derelict leaders caused that day.

Contrary to your false claim, there has been very few attacks on the Supreme Court as a result of the Colorado ruling.

Now, you’re singing the Russian song.

 

First you have to tell me who this beloved fuhrer is you keep claming about.

Yet its you who keeps regurgitating Putin over and over.
Seems he has you trained perfectly

Yet isn't that what you're claiming because Putin said he prefers Biden?
Priceless

Blah blah blah Nobody cares about your insurrection propaganda anymore