What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

SCOTUS: sponsored by Harlan Crow

Handyman said:
The only thing he is supposedly immune from (and they are arguing) was some tweets he made as President. They waved most of the other arguments pre-trial. And again he wasn't President when the scheme started.
Click to expand...

What official act does him making dumb tweets qualify as?
 
ScoobyDoo said:
At best they'll have to retry him, and that's a crapshoot at that point. Much of the evidence that was used at trial has been deemed unusable by the Supreme's and their ruling.
Click to expand...
What? What evidence? Nothing they presented were official stuff from the office of the President. Text messages to the Enquirer and his personal lawyer aren't Presidential acts.
 
rufus said:
What? What evidence? Nothing they presented were official stuff from the office of the President. Text messages to the Enquirer and his personal lawyer aren't Presidential acts.
Click to expand...

The Prosecutor's already caved and has delayed the sentencing. It's only a matter of time. The guy gets away with everything.
 
French Rage said:
What official act does him making dumb tweets qualify as?
Click to expand...

No friggin idea but they were about Cohen and I think Stormy and most of the legal experts seemed to think he would have a claim. At best though it would be a retrial but that will be next year if ever.
 
ScoobyDoo said:
At best they'll have to retry him, and that's a crapshoot at that point. Much of the evidence that was used at trial has been deemed unusable by the Supreme's and their ruling.
Click to expand...

No it hasn't because the evidence predates his being elected. Presidential Immunity only covers the President not a candidate.

And the prosecutors didnt cave...the SC made sentencing on the 11th all but impossible. Merchan would have likely pushed it back to avoid issues brought by the new rules so the DA decided not to make an issue of it and delay sentencing until they know if the trial was even on point anymore.

The Supreme Court broke the rule of law.
 
Last edited:
Handyman said:
No it hasn't because the evidence predates his being elected. Presidential Immunity only covers the President not a candidate.

And the prosecutors didnt cave...the SC made sentencing on the 11th all but impossible. Merchan would have likely pushed it back to avoid issues brought by the new rules so the DA decided not to make an issue of it and delay sentencing until they know if the trial was even on point anymore.

The Supreme Court broke the rule of law.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with anything you said.

The conviction will be overturned.
 
But of course:

SCOTUS Chief Justice’s 2005 Comments About Presidential Immunity Resurface

Shortly after Supreme Court Justice John Roberts ruled in favor of giving Donald Trump immunity for crimes committed in an official capacity, an old clip resurfaced online of him saying during his 2005 Senate confirmation that the president is “fully bound” by the law and the Constitution. At the time, Roberts affirmed that not even the president is “above the law under our system.” The clip appears to contradict Monday’s 6-3 Supreme Court decision that Trump has immunity from some criminal prosecution for his role in attempting to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election. Social media users were quick to call out the justice’s hypocrisy, with some asking if the Supreme Court itself is bound by the law.
Click to expand...

btw - not the exact right thread, but thanks to Taraji P. Henson Project 2025 has been trending in Google and social media.
 
ScoobyDoo said:
I don't disagree with anything you said.

The conviction will be overturned.
Click to expand...

We will see. I can't argue it isnt a possibility.

Andrew Weissmann had this to say:

Judge Merchan moving the sentencing to mid September is smart. It gives Trump and DA and the court time to brief the issues, but Merchan will ultimately reject the weak Trump claims, and importantly the new mid-September sentencing date will make it VERY hard for Trump to then be able to appeal to SCOTUS before the election as he will have to appeal within NY state courts first.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
What really pisses me off personally is the loss of faith in the justice system this is all causing. I clerked for judges for two years after law school, and while I'm not going to pretend they were all brilliant legal scholars, I genuinely thought they were trying their best most of the time and were willing to make the hard calls. The 3 justices who got kicked off Iowa's Supreme Court by voters after approving gay marriage were heroes and martyrs in the eyes of the legal community. And that was just 15 years ago.

I don't know if I was myopic then or jaded now, or both, but I don't think that way anymore. I'd guess at least 50% of appointed judges and 80% of elected judges are just hacks who do what they want with virtually no accountability.

My wife's former boss used to rail against the judiciary. When she'd push back, he'd say "just wait until you're old enough you have to call your dumbass classmate 'Your honor.'" I get that now.

I also get the truth behind the joke, "What do you call the guy who barely passed the bar?"
...
"Your honor."
 
I had a similar thought last night. While I was never a lawyer (was going to but life happens) I studied the law quite a bit and have a lot of family, including my father, who either are lawyers or were all across the spectrum. I had nothing but the highest respect for the law and judges even if I didn't agree with them. I always believed they were doing what they believed was right, even if later on they were proven wrong. Now, I have nothing but contempt for judges especially the Cons on the SC. They all lied to get there, and now they want to consolidate power in ways the founders never agreed with. They are vile, they are idiots and they are Anti-American. They broke the system and they did it with a smile on their face and cash in their pockets.
 
Handyman said:
Seriously?
Click to expand...

Apparently

”Buried on page 14 of a letter that two Democratic senators sent to Attorney General garland on Tuesday, in which they urged Garland to appoint a special counsel to probe Thomas, was an astonishing list of dozens of “likely undisclosed gifts and income” from Crow, Crow’s affiliated companies, and “other donors.”
 
Makes sense from a financial perspective. He costs 3/5 the amount of a white sc judge in terms of ownership

digging thru the long letter it looks like this trip is quite old- so Putin wasn’t a full on dictator yet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top