Posted on 07/01/2024 7:48:23 AM PDT by Tench_Coxe
The Chutkan case is federal, so If the jury convicted Trump because of a preposterous "not an official act" argument Trump could appeal to SCOTUS. If the verdict comes after the election, Smith would have to pull a mangy rabbit out of his tattered hat to make a difference.
This decision therefore reveals that Trump absolutely had the “official” right as President to stop the count.
If I recall correctly, the National Archives shipped the documents to his house because they did not want to deal with them. So, the question of whether or not he ordered them shipped may be a non-issue.
Where you do get that from the decision?
The count is done by Congress. He can't tell them to stop the count.
Some Dems might not want to approve that. It would fail and make the party look even more sleazy than it already does.
Then night of the election when states stopped counting Trump had the right to intervene.
When the President speaks publicly, to a group of Americans, it’s an official act. There’s no other way to look at it.
Eh,I don’t get that from the Opinion. Elections are State affairs?
How would he intervene? Tell them to keep counting? Military?
MY LIGHT BULB went on! Libs always SCREAM about Democracy! Well the Democracy of the Supreme Court voted. So, the Libs are Democracy Deniers...... what hypocrites!
I think that the Left’s meltdown is hilarious. They are postulating that Biden can now suspend elections or assassinate Trump with impunity. They do not realize that the Supreme Court’s decision provides NO complete immunity against illegal actions. Absolutely NONE. It’s just that the initial remedy is impeachment, not political prosecution. Any illegal act, at least any “high crimes or misdemeanors” are still illegal and can still result in punitive actions through impeachment.
I feel all of this isn’t going to matter because July 11th I wouldn’t be surprised if this wacko Judge sentences him to 20 years in prison. These DemoMarxists no longer care how obvious they are and now they are desperate after that debate. If that happens, what are we going to do about it?
Van Jones is correct. Bases are energized by negative events. Dobbs energized the left as Roe v Wade energized the right. There are tons of examples.
Article IV, Section 4: The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.
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.
Re: 53 - and?
There’s little a President can do.
caww: “Then night of the election when states stopped counting Trump had the right to intervene.”
Fury: “Elections are State affairs? How would he intervene? Tell them to keep counting?”
Article IV, Section 4 says that the United States (federal government including the executive branch, thus mandating presidential responsibility and now immunity) shall (must) GUARANTEE that EVERY state has a republican form of government.
Fury, you are correct that how elections are carried out is primarily a state matter.
But caww is correct that the president has a right to intervene in state affairs when there is election mischief. It’s actually one of his constitutional duties.
If President Eisenhower can send federal troops to maintain order and peace in support of the integration of public schools, the president can do the same when there is evidence of election fraud. He can certainly make phone calls inquiring into what happened and suggest ways to remedy known issues.
Federal troops might be needed to be sure that evidence and chain of custody of ballots are preserved when required in order to ensure elections are being conducted honestly.
He ain't right.
This has been kicked back to the trial court judge (Chutkan) to adjudicate which Trump acts fall under official conduct (immunity) vs unofficial conduct (non-immune) in the indictment. And this is key: this immunity question has to be resolved by the judge BEFORE the trial.
It is an exceptionally complex demand, and the Supreme Court has ordered the trial court to be evidence-heavy in analyzing the legality and categorization of every instance of conduct at issue.
All of the judge's rulings on immunity questions are appealable, first to the DC Circuit and then to the Supremes.
And that's before it ever gets to a jury.
Trump will likely have finished much of his second term before this is resolved.
It’s so ridiculous that the SC took this long to come up with this obvious ruling. What the heck do they do all day in there? Play checkers?
Thank you...
for later
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.