Posted on 07/01/2024 9:16:23 AM PDT by RandFan
Two lines from the opinion, where the Supreme Court justices address the trial judge in Trump's election interference case, are getting a lot of attention
"And the parties and the District Court must ensure that sufficient allegations support the indictment’s charges without such conduct," they write.
That means that once the official acts are stripped away, the trial court must decide if there's enough still in the indictment to go forward. They're basically warning that the case against Trump may fall apart.
They also write: "Testimony or private records of the President or his advisers probing such conduct may not be admitted as evidence at trial."
Private records typically include texts, emails and notes, which means a lot of what Trump wrote on 6 January, 2021 may not be used as evidence
(Excerpt) Read more at bbc.co.uk ...
The man has taken a lot of arrows for the people of this nation. Pray that the next four years are not wasted or we will see this tyranny again.
Exactly. And they won’t be able to prosecute Biden, either. Good thing we have a Final Judge.
Doesn’t matter. The Dems have proclaimed SCOTUS to be illegitate. [/s]
There is no way Biden will be prosecuted. He is too old and feeble.
Even if they try, today’s ruling opens up a whole new avenue for appeal.
Yes, such as the documents he took when he was in the Senate, back when Biden, Kerry and Tip O’Neill were trying to save Nicaragua’s Sandinistas for the Soviets.
“If you come at the king, you best not miss.”
And they came after us with a smokescreen. Arg! The smoke is clearing too soon. Oops-a-daisy!
may? LOL
there never was a case!!!
President Donald Trump responds to the Supreme Court’s ruling on presidential immunity in a statement to Fox News. Jonathan Turley weighs in.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=InlUeKSmdpI
(Question ... if this case about the documents falls apart (Jack Smith/Fannie Willis/Etc,) there is still the Stormy Daniels thing. Does anything happening now keep Trump out of Jail on that conviction before the election?)
There’s s/t in the SCOTUS Immunity ruling that says that courts cannot judge the intent of Presidential actions, based on assumptions or hypotheticals.
So, to me, that means that if Trump calls Ga and asks if they can “find 10,000 votes,” then that is not evidence that Trump called Ga and asked for 10,000 illegal votes.
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.