“Given the importance of the trial schedule, the key practical question is whether the court focuses solely on Trump’s case or endorses immunity in other instances. Smith’s gambit is a fallback that would let the court order the trial to proceed even if its opinion extends to broader principles of immunity.”

  • gregorum@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    69
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    That would be some serious abracadabra shit if he pulls this off.

    David Blaine, watch out!

    I wanna know: How the ever living fuck does Trump get the apparently best, dirtiest lawyers that get him out of everything when he’s famous for never paying his lawyers? Wtf?

    Ghouliani is about to not only be homeless, but get strung up and do hard time because if Trump. And he has multiple teams of new lawyers doing horrible things again for him now. HOW??

    • McFarius@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      7 months ago

      They’re working for something better than money. Exposure! Don’t you know working for such a big name will do better things for their career than money! At least, that’s what they tell artists.

    • FilterItOut@thelemmy.club
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      7 months ago

      They’re not the best, they are just flinging shit at the wall and the corruption is deep enough that the shit penetrates it and sticks. ‘Like dissolves like’ and all that, but with stickiness. I also seem to remember something about the recent ones have all been paid in advance.

    • ReallyActuallyFrankenstein@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Truthfully, his lawyers at this point are legitimately not good. Look at his defamation damages. These are not the best lawyers by a long way - those lawyers are keyed into his scheme to not pay them and also usually don’t want to be associated with a completely unreliable client.

      The last time he had good lawyers was probably the first impeachment. Now he’s just coasting on delay tactics. It’s working because it’s worked for 70 years to threaten and delay. That actually does make people defensive, deferentially overcautious, and usually diminishes his liability. It will be a great day when that’s no longer enough to hold back justice, but we’re not there yet.

  • HWK_290@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    7 months ago

    To date, the court has not seemed very sensitive to the political imperative of a verdict that gives voters a piece of critical information before the November election: whether one of the candidates is guilty of a scheme to subvert the last one. That is in stark contrast to the court’s obvious speed in deciding Trump’s eligibility for the Colorado ballot before the state’s primary.

    • ZoopZeZoop@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      It certainly feels that way, but it’s important to have all of your ducks in a row before you go after a former president, especially one who has had such crazy influence on a large portion of the country. It would not do well to miss something or make a misstep that results in a not guilty and immunity via double jeopardy. Getting through the investigation and all of the interviews would take forever, not to mention charging others to get them to flip.

      • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        16
        ·
        7 months ago

        They would have to trip in to a wood chipper to fuck this up. There is no fucking excuse. He has a MILLION charges to deal with. They could’ve lined ONE jail-worthy charge up and snapped him up months upon months ago, but noooo. He’s more guilty than OJ and he wrote a book that was effectively titled, “I DID IT”, yet he’s free FOUR FUCKING YEARS. I call BS on that kind of “justice” system.

        • ZoopZeZoop@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          Again, what if they hadn’t crossed all of their t’s and dotted all of their i’s for that one charge? Look at all of the stunts he has pulled so far. There’s a lot that goes into making charges stick. This is how the justice system works for big cases, not just for Trump. You’re right about him being free all this time, though. That was an injustice against the American people. If most people did what he did, we would have been waiting in jail. That’s where his money and influence really aided him. Although, putting him in jail may have caused his supporters to try again, and in far greater numbers, to bring down democracy. That’ll probably happen anyway, but him being free has delayed that inevitability.

          Anyway, I’m not suggesting we have to like how it has unfolded. I am suggesting that if it had happened some other way, it had a good chance of failing or leading to the fracturing of our democracy.

          Many changes need to be made to prevent this from happening again. He’s a buffoon and his tactics are obvious to everyone except his biggest supporters. It’s almost better that he has done this and exposed many of the flaws in the system, because a competent person would have been successful and wrested power during the last presidential election and there wouldn’t be another this year.

          • spongebue@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            You’re right about him being free all this time, though. That was an injustice against the American people. If most people did what he did, we would have been waiting in jail. That’s where his money and influence really aided him.

            I wouldn’t even go that far. He’s innocent until proven guilty, just like anyone else. Bail exists for a good reason, as it has for centuries. You pay a deposit that makes it worth your while to come back for trial, and you stay out of jail in the meantime. Do that, and you get your money back. If you don’t, that money is forfeit.

            What we’re seeing is how it should work for anyone accused of (but not yet found guilty of) a crime. If there are people unable to afford it or whatever, that should be addressed - it is in our constitution, after all.

            Then when he’s convicted, lock him up like anyone else.

            • ZoopZeZoop@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              7 months ago

              Bail is allowed for folks who are not likely to reoffend/commit other crimes while they wait for trial. I would say he is likely to reoffend/commit other crimes. So, bail should not have been offered. If you or I did what he did, we’d be in jail.

              As an aside, paying for it just means rich people have it easier than poor people. So, again, if he were like us, he’d probably still be in jail.

              • spongebue@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                7 months ago

                If you search “factors in setting bail” you’ll see 5 or so recurring things, and that is not one of them. Closest thing would be danger to community, but we’re generally talking murder and such.

                Even then, he’s no longer president; he’s probably not taking any more documents from the White House. The election is a way off (and was further away when he first left the White House, as this conversation started with) so he can only do so much to be fraudulent with the results. There is a campaign going now. Could he be using those funds to pay off a porn star? I suppose, and so might a judge, but they need a lot more than the prosecution saying “I would say yes, your honor” (but again, it’s all a moot point when reoffending is not really a factor)

  • Edwardthefma99✡@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    116
    ·
    7 months ago

    Why are they wasting thare time trump allredy went thru a trial when they tryed to impeach him he was acquitted unless they have new evadance this is going to be a case of double jeopardy Fifth Amendment states, "No person shall .be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb trump they had thare chance to get trump and they failed

        • morphballganon@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          30
          ·
          7 months ago

          If they were russian their english would be better. Only republicans and very small children are that bad at spelling.

            • morphballganon@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              7 months ago

              But you have the ability to proofread and choose to omit words you’re unsure about, or look up their spelling if you want to use them. People who use misspelled words display not only poor spelling, but also a complete lack of self-reflection and will to improve. These qualities are quintessential in a republican (bad spelling is not, necessarily), and when someone criticises a misspelling, it is actually these qualities that draw their ire.

      • Edwardthefma99✡@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        41
        ·
        7 months ago

        The trile was for high crimes and misdameners if he was guilty he would of been removed from office and then sent over to the doj to be sentenced if it was a criminal offence

        • HopeOfTheGunblade@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          16
          ·
          7 months ago

          No, it isn’t. The DOJ is not involved at any point in an impeachment, and it is entirely a political process, not a fact finding or justice seeking one. If, say, a senate full of Republicans wants to look away from matters and not vote to have him punished, he won’t be. Like he wasn’t. And the consequences they can impart don’t include imprisonment or fines, just removal from office and a ban from holding office.

    • DevCat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      31
      ·
      7 months ago

      Spoken (barely) like someone who has no idea what he’s talking about. Before you respond, get a spell checker and brush up on your grammar.

      • MagicShel@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        7 months ago

        Look, that guy has a lot of lies to post on a lot of social media. The people who are going to fall for it are too stupid to catch the bad spelling and grammar, so there’s no point in wasting time trying to look like his IQ is in the upper half of the curve.