It's down to us.

Democrats' Double Freakout

'First the polls. Starting a week ago, Emerson College and the Hill released a series of swing-state polls, covering Georgia, North Carolina, Nevada, Arizona, Michigan, and Wisconsin. The polls showed Trump leading Biden in each state: +6 in Georgia, +3 in North Carolina, +6 in Nevada, +3 in Arizona, +2 in Michigan, and +3 in Wisconsin. '

Confirms early polls showing the same.

'That’s where the second part of the double freakout comes in. Explicit or not, the calculation in some parts of the Democratic world is this: Maybe Biden is weak, maybe his polls are terrible, but we’ll make Trump a convicted felon, maybe a prison inmate, before the election. That will ensure a Biden victory.'

But they blew the timing. They slow walked for two and half years before the indictment, and they may have waited too long. Now they have gone from slow walk to a great big rush in their desperate attempt to rig the election for Bribed Demented Open Borders Joe.

Here is Lying Jack 'Smith’s most fundamental difficulty: He can’t admit why he is moving so fast. It’s obvious to everyone that he is racing to try Trump before the election. But Justice Department guidelines very clearly say federal prosecutors “may never select the timing of any action, including investigative steps, criminal charges, or statements, for the purpose of affecting any election.” That is what Smith is doing. He can’t admit his true motivation without admitting that he is violating long-held Justice Department rules against interference in an election.'

Lying Jack's lying to the Court about why he is in such a big hurry, and everyone knows why Lying Jack is lying and what he is lying about.

Now that their attempts to rig the election through lawfare appear to be failing, some Dems are inconsolable.

 

Sorry about that.
But I still don't see how Smith can do anything to rush the trial.
The judges sets schedules, period.
Sure, Smith would like it before the election, the whole country besided MAGA wants it pre election.
But Smith has no control on when it happens.

 

Delayed it?
I am in a discussion with another poster claiming the Smith is rushing the trial.
But you say they delayed getting to trial?

People need to make up their minds, was it being delayed or rushed.
And, keep in mind, Lawyers don't set schedules.
They can say they aren't ready, often happens, and the judge can or can not set a new date.
Most of the time each side is given at least 1 delay if they aren't ready. But it's not in perpetuity.

 

I had already posted this link, but will do so again...

""When Smith sought certiorari before judgment in the immunity case back in December 2023, he argued that early review by the Supreme Court was needed for the following reason: “It is of imperative public importance that respondent’s claims of immunity be resolved by this Court and that respondent’s trial proceed as promptly as possible if his claim of immunity is rejected.” The brief added that “if this case proceeds through the ordinary—and even a highly expedited—appellate process, it is unclear whether this Court would be able to hear and resolve the threshold immunity issues during its current Term.” That would mean, in turn, that the then-scheduled March 4 trial date would not be met—a date, Smith argued quoting the trial court judge, that was needed to “ensure [fulfillment of] the public’s interest in seeing this case resolved in a timely manner.”
The Consequences of Jack Smith's Rush to Trial | Lawfare (lawfaremedia.org)

 

He failed, yes?
Why?
He can't set court dates. That's what I've been saying.

Just all lawyers can ask, they can request a time frame. They can't actually set them.

And guess what, trump lawyers will delay this trial for as long as possible. But the judge will set the date it/they feel the best.

 

Actually, supreme court is all we have now given states like NY, GA have found creative ways to stretch the laws and charge trump with never before seem charges in our history. States like colorado and Illinois attempting to subvert will of the people by removing trump from ballot based on no crime. DOJ has gone rogue trying to take out a political opponent… supreme court to rescue. We are dangerously close to becoming like a 3rd world country where justice system is weaponized against political opponents. Thank god for supreme court standing on principles which made this country great - THE CONSTITUTION

 

Im not sure what is your point?

You were saying that he cannot do anything to speed up the trial, and I showed you a credible link to what he submitted in his attempt to do just that.

What other proof do I need?

Now you are arguing that he doesn't have absolute control, which is an argument that nobody is waging. Of course he doesn't have absolute control, but he is doing his level best to speed it up for the election, that much is not in question.

 

States still have the right to enforce and protect the laws of their State, as long as it doesn't over step the bounds set by the constitution.

 

LOL.
The POINT of my post is, JUDGES, set the trial dates.
NOT the LAWYERS.

 

THIS IS A STRAWMAN ARGUMENT BECAUSE NOBODY IS CLAIMING THAT THE PROSECUTOR HAS THE FINAL WARD.

Both the prosecutor and the defense team impact that decision by the arguments that they make to impact that trial date.

You have no problem recognizing that the defense is trying to delay, but in the other direction, you suddenly cannot fathom, because the judge sets the date.

 

I have no problem thinking the prosecution wants to have an earlier trial.
I just know the prosecution nor the defense don't set the dates.

 

What a prosecutor internally "wants" is not the problem. Working to do so based on an election timetable is where the problem comes in. Smith has done his best to rush it due to the election. He legally cannot claim that to be his motive, but everyone knows that it is, which is precisely what the link I gave you explained in great detail.

Whether YOU have a problem with it is of no consequence.

 

I'm not sure why you're confused and I'm not going to read every conversation in this thread, but given the fact that you've confused your conversation with me I can only assume the same has been done as well.

Here's what's going on:
1. The alleged crime occurred in January 2021.
2. The indictment wasn't until late summer 2023. This is an awkward delay considering all the other indictments associated with the "insurrection" and seems to have been timed to interfere with the election.
3. Jack Smith assumed that the trial would have kept going in Chutkan's courtroom during appeals because he didn't realize recent SCOTUS precedent stays the proceedings. And even after the proceedings were stayed he continued to violate a court order to stop introducing new evidence and dropping new filings to the case.
4. Now Jack Smith is scrambling to accelerate things in order to keep the initial goal of trying this case during the campaign on schedule.
5. This could have already been resolved if they hadn't waited until late summer to indict. The basis of the case is from evidence they had in 2021.

So, two things can be true. First, the indictment was delayed to interfere in the election. Now that the pre-trial process is taking longer than Jack Smith thought, he is trying to rush things. This isn't hard and without reading the other conversation you're having I'm confident that the issue is a comprehension failure on your part, as is the case with me.

Edit: Skimmed the prior conversation and confirmed comprehension issue considering you're quoting two different people and jamming together their unique opinions because you don't even realize who you're talking to. He's also talking about Jack Smith trying to rush the case after the proceedings were stayed because he's a bad attorney and didn't properly time the case accounting for appeals due to thinking he could keep the case moving in Chutkan's courtroom on appeal. He's not conflicting with me. He's saying the same thing. Comprehension skills are important.

 

I didn't confuse your conversation. I had no conversation with you, until you butted in.

 

Smith has done all he can to expedite the trials. Trump has done all he can to delay the. Expedited trials are in the country's interest which is why Trump wants to delay them.

 

Nevada fake electors won’t stand trial until January 2025 under judge’s new schedule
https://apnews.com/article/nevada-r...ctment-trump-750c73f864b951c6fc4063be77ffd0a3

I feel a pardon coming.

 

Yes. The more extreme lunatics on the Left with their wild 14A theories got a 9-0 bitch slapping on that one.

Should Sotomayor resign now before Dems lose the Presidency and the Senate, perhaps for 12 years?

 

Yes, it is down to us to turn the country around and bring democracy back. VOTE FOR TRUMP!

 

The deepstate is helping trump!!

 

This is the same person who made a similar thread entitled "Let's get this straight" before going on insurrectionist rants about Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. After the SCOTUS calls them threats to our democracy and shoots them down, they start on the next thing. They don't want the Supreme Court making rulings because they're afraid of having their election interference attempts slowed down. It's blatantly obvious and quite sad. The question isn't whether the President has unlimited presidential immunity; the question is where the boundaries exist for official acts. That is what they need to define. If the lower courts hadn't had Trump Derangement Syndrome, like the Colorado case, this likely wouldn't have been reviewed. But because they went so extreme in their ruling, the SCOTUS now needs to set the confines of presidential immunity.

 

If you'd like to discuss election interference we could talk about 1/6. Or we could talk about Trump's strategy of delaying trials so the American voters are denied the opportunity to know what the verdicts are.

 

Oh, I get it. You think supporting some insurrections and election interference attempts is acceptable because other people supported other means. Sorry, that's not how it works.

Supporting insurrections and election interference wasn't enough. Now opposing due process is on the menu. This doesn't strengthen your position.

 

Sorry for not being clear. Accusations of election interference by Repubs, RWM, and Don are horseshit. Just another talking point to explain away Trump's criminal behavior.

 

Ah, denialism is the new argument to defend support of an insurrection and election interference. This is precisely why even super liberal Justice Jackson said support of Colorado's latest insurrection attempt is a threat to our democracy. It's difficult to take threads like this seriously when people can't come to terms with their prior support of an insurrection and election interference. Truth is, people who supported a highly illegal effort to prevent a free and fair election by reinterpreting the law into something it never was don't have much of a leg to stand on here.

 

You act as if it's something new. You folks have been ineffectually doing it for years. Now, after being unable to defend Trump's insurrectionist plot, and his subsequent election interference by delaying justice, you're left with no choice but transparently, embarrassingly, doing what you always do. Project on to Dems what Repubs are doing. Making you difficult to take seriously.