Posted on 06/02/2024 11:09:20 AM PDT by Sidebar Moderator
Speculation is running rampant about the need for a “hook” to get the Supremes to consider cert on the bogus Bragg conviction. Recall that the alleged “falsified” business records all supposedly occurred in 2017.
Last time I checked, Trump was president at the time. I’m not a lawyer, but if SCOTUS reaffirms broad presidential immunity (as I believe they will, definitely after the clown show in New York) on the basis of separation of powers, this will upend the J6 case, almost all of the documents case and the Fulton RICO case in its entirety. At a minimum, a broad immunity ruling could impact the Bragg case in interesting ways.
I thought President Trump handed over the day-to-day operations of The Trump Organization to Don Jr. and Eric after taking office. If these legal expenses were booked in 2017, how is President Trump responsible for them?
Am I missing something?
I guess I'm not clear about the timeline. Didn't the NDA with Clifford happen in October 2016? Unless the transactions were booked in the first 20 days of the year, what were the transactions that occurred in 2017 while President Trump's children were running the company?
-PJ
Good call..... the alleged “falsified” business records “so as not to influence an election,”
which cockeyed Bragg mfg as a “crime.” all supposedly occurred in 2017.
<><>Drum roll, please......Trump was already president at the time.
If SCOTUS reaffirms broad presidential immunity (probably will, after NY’s clown show) on the basis of separation of powers,
<><>this will upend the J6 case,
<><>almost all of the documents case
<><>and Fani’s Fulton RICO case in its entirety.
At a minimum, a broad immunity ruling could impact the Bragg case in interesting ways.
Roberts may be a problem, he may be subject to blackmail over irregularities in the adoption of his two children.
The Left WILL use that.
The first transaction was booked in February. You are right about Trump having delegated control of the Trump Organization to Eric and Don Jr. But the jury verdict makes that point moot. What I’m addressing is a broader question; beyond the particulars about the merits or demerits of the case, a broad immunity decision can’t help but impact the Bragg case.
Thanks!
“SCOTUS’s immunity decision will be handed down by late June, at the latest.”
That’s what I remember reading in a story a few weeks ago.
During proceedings, I also remember questions about the legality of the appointment of Jack Smith as Special Prosecutor since his appointment was never confirmed by Congress.
And further, I think there were questions from some Justices about the fairness of allowing partisan local and state officials to prosecute a nationally elected President (or ex-President).
y/v/w
Amy Coney Barrett
Ballotpedia
https://ballotpedia.org › Amy_Coney_Barrett
Amy Coney Barrett is an associate justice of the U.S. Supreme Court.
She was President Donald Trump’s (R) third nominee to the court.
We have two comments deleted BEFORE I could read them. Can we at least get a five minute countdown? Clean-up on aisle 8 in five minutes. Four minutes. Three minutes Two minutes . .better hurry. One minute, It’s gone.
My concern is that vindication by immunity still implies bad conduct, whereas vindication by an overturned decision for trial misconduct by the court and the prosecutor is far better.
They could always argue that Trump acted feloniously if he is exonerated by immunity. It would never the effectively rebutted.
“I thought President Trump handed over the day-to-day operations of The Trump Organization to Don Jr. and Eric after taking office. If these legal expenses were booked in 2017, how is President Trump responsible for them?”
Because the prosecution said he was.
“while President Trump’s children were running the company?”
Jr. and his lawyer were the trustees on the revocable trust.
Trump was authorized to withdraw funds at his request.
“We have two comments deleted BEFORE I could read them. Can we at least get a five minute countdown?”
ROTFLMAO!
I've argued that everything a President does is a "presidential" act because he's the sole embodiment of the Executive branch an it's a 24/7 job. That said, I'd be hard-pressed to declare that Trump signing checks and overseeing the booking of transaction within The Trump Organization is not a personal act. If Trump signed bogus checks in the name of the Trump Organization while President, that should clearly NOT be covered under Presidential immunity, and it would likely open him up to emoluments scrutiny, too.
Before President Trump, the richest President ever was George Washington. Washington had a thriving farming business in Virginia while he was President. In fact, his farms were selling wheat to England while Washington was President. I don't recall anyone claiming that President Washington was violating the emoluments clause of the Constitution because his farms were doing business with a foreign country. In fact, despite having farm managers in Virginia overseeing the day-to-day operations of his farms while he was residing in Philadelphia, Washington still made the major decisions regarding his farms and visited them often. Nobody questioned the accounting of Washington's farms, nor investigated the customers that Washington did business with.
It wasn't until President Trump that the idea of separating "core Presidential" from "personal" acts was even a thing.
-PJ
IIRC-—TRUMP SENT BOXES OF DOCUMENTS TO THE NATIONAL ARCHIVES as he was packing up the Oval OFFICE, etc.
The National ARCHIVES SENT a PILE OF BOXES BACK & I SAW PICS OF THAT. AT least 20 “BANKER BOXES” in size. ...spread out on the WH grounds on perhaps a patio...
Trump then took those boxes to MAR A LAGO.
WAS THIS ALL A SET-UP TO BEGIN WITH???
BUNGLING BIDEN HAS BOXES ALL OVER THE PLACE-—NOT ANY SECURITY AT ALL.
Feral Irish built this country.
We got the Irish that were smart enough to get out of Ireland.
” That said, I’d be hard-pressed to declare that Trump signing checks and overseeing the booking of transaction within The Trump Organization is not a personal act. If Trump signed bogus checks in the name of the Trump Organization while President, that should clearly NOT be covered under Presidential immunity, and it would likely open him up to emoluments scrutiny, too.”
The charges were “made or caused to be made”. I have never seen who signed the checks. Jr and Trump’s lawyer were the trustees for the revocable trust but they could have assigned a lower person check signing authority.
I’m guessing the circuit judge for NY is probably Kagan or Sotomayor in which case, they’ll deny it
I do not have faith that the SC is going to save Trump. Trump has lost every step of the way, on every court case. There is no reason to believe the SC is going to just jump in and save the day.
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.