Supremes deny Jack Smith and sidesteps decision on Trump presidential immunity claim
(www.nbcnews.com)
POPCORN AVALANCHE!!!
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (43)
sorted by:
Not that helpful IMHO.
Extremely helpful. The deep state is desperate to keep Trump off the ballot and hinder his run.
This pushes Jackass desire to have a trial starting March 4th way back. Maybe even until after the 2024 election. Not only that it gives more time for Jackasses extortion in Europe, the unconstitutional process by which he was appointed and this question about who Jackass really is, to be uncovered. More disclosure only awakens more people.
Trump’s lawyers argue that his role in questioning the result of the election was within the “outer perimeter” of his official responsibilities as president, citing a 1982 Supreme Court ruling about presidential immunity. Therefore, under Supreme Court precedent, Trump is immune from prosecution, his lawyers say.
Smith was asking SCOTUS to rule whether Trump has immunity or not. They said no and kicked it back to the DC court that will have a hearing on Jan 9.
There would be no due process if SCOTUS jumped the shark. Think moves and countermoves. This is very helpful IMO.
Trump took an oath to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Wanting to ensure the election wasn't stolen by foreign or domestic enemies was absolutely part of his Presidential duties.