Posted on 08/02/2023 9:27:41 AM PDT by SoConPubbie
Yes he is weakened.
You are a sheep that wants to be led by other sheep.
You are a child that does not understand the long term battle we are in. IT IS GOING TO TAKE YEARS TO TURN THINGS AROUND. Trump didn’t get you your lollipop, so now you don’t like him.
Maybe you have get your own lollipop, Trump can’t do it all. HE IS DOING MORE THAT HIS FAIR SHARE.
The USSC shouldn’t just wait for a review. They need to step in and claim this case is in their original jurisidiction, as it amounts to an attempted deprivation of not just Donald Trump’s civil rights, but the civil rights of every single US citizen, in all 50 states.
“He lost the 2018 mid-terms in colossal fashion.”
“He lost”???
Historically, the opposition wins the midterm elections.
“He could not get re-elected in 2020, despite the power of incumbency.”
That means you think Joe Biden got 81 million votes and that means you are an idiot.
“Many of his high profile candidates in 2022 went down in flames.”
Not many, some, but some were due to corrupt elections, as in Arizona.
“He’s stuck in the low to mid 40s when matched against Biden in 2024.”
And if you believe the Sniffer can beat Trump, or anyone else next year, then you are an idiot. If you go by the polls, he is beating Biden.
“...the Mara Lago matter is quite serious.”
Serious due the supposed legal jeopardy, but all the legal experts I have heard discuss it say it will be kicked out. Go research what Mark Levin is saying.
“We need a candidate who can be laser focused on taking out Biden / Harris, and not be preoccupied with legal matters that are growing exponentially.”
Trump has been fighting these battles since he took office and did just fine. Every hear of Russiagate?
“laser focused”
You must think that sounds analytical. Taking out the democrats and the legal battles are one and the same thing, in case you don’t know.
Bingo. If the GOP tries to foist someone else on us as the candidate, I don’t expect that person would be able to break 30% of the popular vote, even if there is no fraud at all.
And who would that be?
Well, the Supreme Court could always claim original jurisdiction and just take the case away from the lower court.
Sure they did. Where’s the audio recording then? We’ve known since Nixon everything in the Oval Office gets recorded, right?
“the Mara Lago matter is quite serious”
No, it isn’t. Presidents are not even subject to the law they indicted him under in that case.
He was no longer president.
The USSC is an appellate court. The case has to go through the lower courts first.
Indeed he was not. But he is still not subject to the Espionage Act.
All you have to know to understand why that is so, is to know that:
a) the Espionage Act makes it illegal for any “unauthorized person” to possess “information vital to the national security of the United States”.
b) every single ex-President possesses such information
and
c) no ex-President has ever been prosecuted under the Espionage Act for possession of such information
I’m afraid knowing those 3 facts leads to only 1 possible conclusion.
“The USSC is an appellate court.”
False. The Supreme Court has original jurisdiction over quite a few matters.
Any republican worth more that a pitcher of warm spot has almost zero chance, including Desantis.
And even if they managed to miraculously overcome all the fraud they would be nothing more than the deep state's chew toy for four years just like trump.
I agree with Dershowitz if trump wanted the insurrection why would he request 10,000 National Guards days before the event.
Pelosi refused the request that’s where the guilt lies in the set up for Trump.
Democrat party added a big red check mark on it that will last forever.
All they want is to have Trump in prison long enough to Epstein himself.
Drew give it up YOUR GUY is a LOSER!!
Thank you I was in the back!! Maybe a little louder for Drew he doesn’t get it!!
It takes 4 justices to vote to take a case. Each circuit is assigned to a justice who can issue an injunction in that circuit without consulting the rest of the court, but I believe that is the extent of a single justice’s authority.
And that first requires there to be a case to take, you can’t just approach the supreme court and ask. I believe that in RARE instances they can yoink an appeal out of the hands of the circuit court of appeals and directly review a district court decision, but that is exceedingly rare.
There’s a big difference between being told something and knowing it to be true.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.