this post was submitted on 20 Dec 2023
181 points (95.9% liked)

politics

18081 readers
3442 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect!
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Donald Trump opposes the special counsel’s request for the Supreme Court to decide right now whether he has any immunity from federal prosecution for alleged crimes he committed while in office, lawyers for the former president told the justices in court papers Wednesday.

Special counsel Jack Smith asked the high court last week to review a lower-court ruling that Trump, as a former president, is not immune from the election subversion criminal case. Smith in his appeal to the justices asked them to take the rare step of reviewing the issue before a federal appeals court in Washington, DC, weighs in.

But Trump, whose legal strategy in the case so far has largely revolved around attempts to delay the proceedings, told the justices that Smith should not be able to leapfrog over the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit to resolve the critical issue.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 70 points 6 months ago (19 children)

The right to a speedy trial is the right of the defense and the prosecution. I hope they reject Trump's motion.

load more comments (19 replies)
[–] cheese_greater 62 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (2 children)

(IF) He's innocent, wats the problem with the 🚬highest🚬 Court in all the land clearing his name once and for all lol?

Why wait? Save the Courts all the meritless appeals

[–] not_that_guy05 38 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Wasting time that's why. The longer the delay, the better for him and his campaign of BS lies that people will eat up.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 6 months ago

Or more specifically: he’s hoping to run out the clock while simultaneously clinching the GOP nomination and the presidency, at which point he’ll just pardon himself, immediately kicking off a constitutional crisis of pretty fucking epic proportions. And that’s before he kicks off any of the other constitutional crises he’s undoubtedly champing at the bit to kick off as well.

[–] cheese_greater 4 points 6 months ago

Oh I know the gam3, I was getting cute cuz its so obvious it must be getting painful. Thanks regardless ;)

[–] RunningInRVA 12 points 6 months ago (1 children)

This is actually a legitimate argument that will be used against him in this matter. He can’t have/want it both ways. He can’t want to simultaneously clear his name (as he is the supposed victim in all this) and also argue for a delay in that process.

[–] cheese_greater 7 points 6 months ago (1 children)

He can't not think any other way than two ways. The biggest issue these folks have or purposely misrepresent is that when it comes to anything involving them, it can't be falsifiable. They have to be able to pivot any which way at any time because none of it is real or evidence-backed.

Its a terrifying and miserable existence as opposed to living in truth and letting reality tell the story instead of having to constantly remember lies and bullshit justifications and running into people you lied or screwed

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago

I knew someone like this, his entire universe was a collection of random lies, and he'd always adapt the story for maximum impact with different audiences. He got a high from it. He lived for that feeling of manipulating people. So unfortunately in my experience, even though he was miserable without the lies, sewing the web of lies was a high point in his life. Normal people would feel sick to their stomachs lying so much, but psychos lack this reaction.

[–] [email protected] 36 points 6 months ago (1 children)

“Do the thing I specifically hired you to do!”

[–] Thirdborne 13 points 6 months ago

I think the conservative justices will be happy to see his demise and the rise of his more competent successor. I doubt he can count on them for any favors.

[–] [email protected] 34 points 6 months ago

Smith in his appeal to the justices asked them to take the rare step of reviewing the issue before a federal appeals court in Washington, DC, weighs in.

There is nothing rare about the request. It's called "cert before judgement" and the DoJ used it 10 times in the four years that Trump was president.

It's most commonly used in a situation like this where the appeal is interlocutory meaning the appeal stops the trial cold while it's resolved.

[–] [email protected] 30 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Delay, delay, delay.

He knows his ass is toast.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I don't even think he's doing this because his ass is toast. He's doing it because he thinks he's going to win the election, and if/when he does he'll just pardon himself. Then the point is moot.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 6 months ago (3 children)

Honestly, if America is a place where someone can commit treason countless times, get elected, and absolve himself of that treason, I really don’t want to be here anymore.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago

And don't forget he literally ran his campaign on "I think my opponent should be locked up but is escaping justice because rich politicians don't live by the same rules you and me do".

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] scripthook 12 points 6 months ago

Ironic given he kicks everything else up to the Supreme Court and just proves he wants to use the Appeals Court to delay past 2024

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


Donald Trump opposes the special counsel’s request for the Supreme Court to decide right now whether he has any immunity from federal prosecution for alleged crimes he committed while in office, lawyers for the former president told the justices in court papers Wednesday.

Special counsel Jack Smith asked the high court last week to review a lower-court ruling that Trump, as a former president, is not immune from the election subversion criminal case.

But Trump, whose legal strategy in the case so far has largely revolved around attempts to delay the proceedings, told the justices that Smith should not be able to leapfrog over the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit to resolve the critical issue.

“The Special Counsel urges this Court to bypass those ordinary procedures, including the longstanding preference for prior consideration by at least one court of appeals, and rush to decide the issues with reckless abandon.

The Court should decline that invitation at this time, for several reasons,” attorneys for Trump wrote.

Even if they decline to hear it before the DC Circuit weighs in, it’s likely that the case will come before them again soon, as the appeals court has said it will expedite its review of the matter.


The original article contains 249 words, the summary contains 198 words. Saved 20%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

load more comments
view more: next ›