Jump to content

2024 Presidential Election thread


pfife

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, MichiganCardinal said:

This case wasn't going to be heard before the election anyway though, that's the weird thing to me.

The easy way to kick the can was already lined up by the Supreme Court. Prosecuting a former President will now take months, if not years, of evidentiary hearings to suss out the line between official acts and unofficial acts. That wasn't going to happen before November.

This one maybe not.   Didn't all of the theft happen after he was president so he couldn't possibly have been acting in official presidential capacity?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to tie what happened here to some of the comments made after the events of Saturday, I do think this ruling reminds us that some of the comments that dismiss the concerns about our government (ie. "no, the country isn't going to end if Trump is elected) seem a little too dismissive of the idea that another Trump term would drastically alter what this country looks like going forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, pfife said:

It's obviously bad, but it will be appealed and she may have removed herself from any further jurisprudence in the case if it survives appeal. 

I’ll be shocked if she’s even a judge in a few years.  I expect her to resign and take a ridiculously high paying job with the Adelson Family Foundation. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, pfife said:

This one maybe not.   Didn't all of the theft happen after he was president so he couldn't possibly have been acting in official presidential capacity?

Depending on the evidence that was being used, they would have needed to litigate who was going to say what. When a number of the government's witnesses were probably people close to him during his administration (e.g., Nauta), there are arguments to be made that those statements are official acts.

Likewise, if an element of any of the charges is that he have personally delivered the documents to their improper location, he can argue that when the documents were delivered (when he was President) they were official acts, so the government can't prove that element.

It's the same reason the sentencing on the Stormy Daniels case is delayed. If any of the evidence used was evidence of official acts that SCOTUS now says shouldn't have been used against him, he may get a new trial, without that evidence being introduced.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, MichiganCardinal said:

Depending on the evidence that was being used, they would have needed to litigate who was going to say what. When a number of the government's witnesses were probably people close to him during his administration (e.g., Nauta), there are arguments to be made that those statements are official acts.

Likewise, if an element of any of the charges is that he have personally delivered the documents to their improper location, he can argue that when the documents were delivered (when he was President) they were official acts, so the government can't prove that element.

It's the same reason the sentencing on the Stormy Daniels case is delayed. If any of the evidence used was evidence of official acts that SCOTUS now says shouldn't have been used against him, he may get a new trial, without that evidence being introduced.

Good stuff, thanks.  I had forgotten that the SCOTUS had judicial restrainted themselves into also taking the evidence off the table too, as the constitution says.

Of course even if it was obvious that none of it was official duty stuff they still litigate it.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Hongbit said:

I’ll be shocked if she’s even a judge in a few years.  I expect her to resign and take a ridiculously high paying job with the Adelson Family Foundation. 

The federal courts, like too much of government itself, has become just another career grift.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, pfife said:

.......   For one of the most dangerous jobs in all of the land......

I’ve been very impressed at how Kamala was able to navigate such a difficult assignment. 😉 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...