MSNBC Blogger Rubs Worry Beads Over Trump 1/6 Immunity Appeal Delay

Rumble ^ | January 28, 2024 | P.J. Gladnick

[PJ-Comix]

Jordan Rubin, a legal blog writer at MSNBC, is getting very very nervous to the point of appearing to anxiously rub worry beads over the delay the U.S. Court of Appeals is taking to rule on Donald Trump's immunity appeal which threatens to also delay his J6 trial scheduled for March 4. Here is Rubin on Friday in a state of high anxiety over the appeal delay in "What’s taking the Trump immunity appeal ruling so long?"

[PJ-Comix]

That guy will be a NERVOUS WRECK if no decision on immunity appeal by next Friday. BTW, this mean that the two liberal judges are having trouble getting the third judge to buy into their arguments. Yeah, 2 to 1 ruling against turns down the immunity appeal but if the third judge puts up good arguments then that means the en banc full appeals court will probably have to take it up and deal with the arguments put up by the judge who didn't follow the party line. Ditto the Supreme Court. Delays alone based on appeals could extend the J6 trial date past November election. Oh, and then there is the chance that Trump's immunity appeal would be given a favorable decision which kills all the federal charges plus the Fani Willis case although the latter's case will probably die on its own due to the CORRUPTION of Willis directing her boyfriend to bone her on the taxpayer dime.

[Bloody Sam Roberts]

The judge in the Fani Willis trial considers that trial and Willis’ extra-curricular activities two separate issues. It’s very likely that the latter will not have any bearing on the former. The fix is in.

[alloysteel]

“What’s taking the Trump immunity appeal ruling so long?”

The case brought by Fani Willis has remarkably little merit. The longer it goes on, whether Fani Willis is or is not removed from office, the less merit it holds.

Running out the clock, if that is what it takes to deflate the case, is pretty good strategy right now.

[PsechsySr]

The so-called ‘worry beads’ are the Muslim equivalent of a Rosary, to keep track of how many times they recite a particular prayer.

Consider the response if the commentator was a devout Catholic who was handling a Rosary instead of a Muslim flouting his Subha (’worry beads’).

[Rockingham]

Good analysis. Even if there is a firm 3-0 Court of Appeals panel vote against Trump in spite of case law authority in his favor, there would almost certainly be a lot of time-consuming back and forth between the judges as to the basis for the decision, the precise terms of the holding, and the details of the opinion.

Even anti-Trump judges must wonder uncomfortably if a decision against immunity for Trump might help put Biden and officials in his administration in the cross hairs for prosecution by a Trump II Department of Justice. Even judicial immunity could be affected. Often, for judges on a politically hot case, delay is the best protective tactic in the hope that time and events may moot the controversy.

[bort]

1/The most likely dissenting judge is Judge Henderson, a Republican appointee. She is the senior judge 👩‍⚖️ on the panel. She voted against expediting oral argument in the case. If she decides to rule against Trump, she, as the senior judge, would write the majority opinion, which means that she could control the timeline of how fast the opinion comes out.

[Pete Dovgan]

Here is the rub.

Trump doesn’t have immunity, then neither does Obama, Biden, and Clinton. Obama set up Trump with an illegal operation and murdered a 16 year old US citizen who had committed no crime. Biden, well it’s a long list already from VP to POTUS. Do we need to talk about Clinton?

The liberals don’t want the Trump to have immunity. They are trying to figure how they can make what exists, immunity, disappear in this special circumstance. This is part of the double justice system that the liberals have imposed. The logic will probably resemble Robert’s explanation of Obama care being legal.

[nikos1121]

I heard that the other two attorneys, did not want to take the case, because they didn’t think was a good case.

[ExcursionGuy84]

Another Cmdr. Francis Nathaniel Queeg in the making...

[WASCWatch]

If you add in the time Trump has to file a motion to reconsider appeal any negative decision to an en banc panel; a motion to reconsider that decision, the time allowed to appeal to the SCOTUS; to get that case placed on the docket and schedule a hearing; then months to issue an opinion, then the time allowed to file a motion to reconsider; the Jan 6 case has no chance of going to trial.

On top of all this, there are many more issues to go through the same appellate process, this case won't go to trial for at least 18 months, if then. One thing is for sure, the SCOTUS will do everything possible to not be forced to hear the case and issue a written opinion. That's especially the case with CJ Roberts. Why is all this taking so long? Most defendants don't have to money to do all these appeals.

[ChildOfThe60s]

Your last sentence brought up one of the rarely spoken about goals of these trials. The bottomless pockets of the government versus the deep but not bottomless pockets of Donald Trump.

For the Democrats government lawfare is as much about bankrupting and economically and publicly destroying their enemies as it is actually putting them in jail