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

Democrats and good character is an oxymoron.

 

Look they forgot to bring their semiautomatic assault weapons to the insurrection. Just lots of huge American flags!

 

In the hands of a MAGA, even a flag becomes dangerous.

 

Trump isn’t getting special treatment, the Democrats chose to ignore section 5 of the 14th Amendment.

 

More like lied to.

 

So, you WANTED them to come even MORE ARMED?? So, you support this kind of violence?? Those must be the new Rep (Trumpian) "values".

 

Trump is receiving no special treatment. He is receiving the treatment required by law.

Ordinary folks spouting legal expertise as if they were qualified lawyers ... HILARIOUS!!!

(Makes one wonder if they offer advice to their surgeon!)

 

I'm so glad to read that.

Because a lot of MAGA claim Trump is the victim of a gigantic judicial conspiracy.

Trump still has to face justice in 4 criminal trials and he's already lost 3 civil ones.

He is receiving the treatment required by law.

Well said.

 

And if Trump is not convicted of any crimes you’ll still hold this opinion?

 

Radical Democrats can risk their own necks weaponizing the American system of justice with their biased, vacuous attacks. But the very system they wish to subvert remains strong and able to protect the rights of the individual they incessantly attack. Even the radical left wingers on the Supreme Court like Sotomayer cannot ignore the law as written, as evidenced by the 9-0 decision regarding Colorado's attempt to deny voters the right to vote as they wish.

 

Will flags be banned now?

 

Hoe many Trump related cases have they taken up? Its like they work directly for him, and I'll bet there has never been a time when the USSC has been so involved in presidential elections than now.

 

The SC is as overtly partisan as they have ever been.
Totally in the tank for Trump.
This version of the Court (led by Reactionaries Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, Bart, and ACB) is a Disgrace to America.

 

Yes, that nine to nothing decision was certainly a way to help Trump's campaign, right?

 

The Supreme Court has decided presidential immunity cases before and has never really reversed the 1867 case with President Andrew Johnson that gave him more or less the level of immunity Trump is claiming today other than some token cases like whether Clinton had to sit for depositions, whether Presidents could be called as witnesses, and whether they had to answer subpoenas. I expect the SCOTUS will scale that back some and try to do some more specific analysis of official acts akin to what happened with the Bob McDonnell conviction reversal and all the public corruption convictions that fell after that. The SCOTUS isn't doing anything special for Trump. This case arrived when it did because of the timing of the cases against him. If they rushed a decision, then they would be doing something different for Trump, but they aren't. They'll hear it when they hear it and they will release the opinion when they normally do opinion dumps at the end of the term.

 

The case was laid out so well by the DC District, that the Supreme Court should have simply dismissed the appeal for immunity. Pathetic...

 

Zionism is a development of American Christian Fundamentalism and it's English predecessor.

The origin was a branch of dispensationalism the brainchild of J N Darby. In the book of Revelation
the millennial rule of Christ is mentioned, there is I recall a dispute between premillennialists and
postmillennialists, but basically the Jews have to return to Israel and the temple gets rebuilt in
Jerusalem, and that is Zionism; a branch of Christianity.

Balfour and other top aristocrats and rules were disciples of the millennial beliefs as are
American Christian Fundamentalists today.

Jehovah's Witnesses also believe it, just wait until they visit and ask, but they have the
sense not to start a war to make it happen, because their belief is God will do it at
the right time, and they are right.

 

That post has little to do with the post it is supposed to be responding to.

 

You mean like, by making it a fair contest rather than approving the LW strategy of curtailing Trump's ability to campaign?

 

Oh.... So what were the crusades about?

 

Oh, I should have put some dates in.
J N Darby invented dispensationalism sometime around 1845.

J N Darby was not trained in theology and although his theology
solved one problem it created others. He was outside the mainstream
churches but had a following that included the then Prime Minister
of Britain, Arthur Balfour who became PM in 1902.

Arthur Balfour authored the Balfour Declaration in 1917 permitting
European Jews to settle in Palestine provided they did not interfere
with the lives and religious observances of the Arabs then living there.

The 'white Christians' you mentioned largely took over from the British
Zionists and have since supplied every kind of support to the European
Jews in Palestine, including weapons and a seat in the UN and as
many UN vetoes as needed.

I suspect the war in the Middle East we have decided to get involved
in could turn into something really big very soon, though I hope not,
and, it isn't really relevant to this thread except it may soon become
Donald Trump's problem.