DC - Former President Donald Trump indicted, 4 federal counts in 2020 election interference, 1 Aug 2023, Trial 4 Mar 2024 #2

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Inthedetails said:
I'm braced for disappointment, tbh.

jmo
Click to expand...
If they do rule in favor of immunity, aren't there some [reasonable but impactful and otherwise legal/ethical] things the current President could do with this new power which must logically apply to him as well?

Like maybe decree that "not a convicted felon" be added to the eligiblity criteria for being President?

Or something with similar impact. I guess it would have to be something that the courts couldn't overturn in less than a six month timeframe.

Maybe it would finally be time to pack the court to save the nation?

MOO
 
Auntie Cipation said:
If they do rule in favor of immunity, aren't there some [reasonable but impactful and otherwise legal/ethical] things the current President could do with this new power which must logically apply to him as well?

Like maybe decree that "not a convicted felon" be added to the eligiblity criteria for being President?

Or something with similar impact. I guess it would have to be something that the courts couldn't overturn in less than a six month timeframe.

Maybe it would finally be time to pack the court to save the nation?

MOO
Click to expand...
The President cannot change the criteria for being President as that is part of the Constitution. Changing the Constitution is a lengthy process requiring both houses of Congress to first agree to it and then sending it to the states for ratification. It's a slow process with lots of checks and balances along the way.

To put it in perspective, the Equal Right Amendment that specifies men and women should have equal rights has never passed the process and it was first proposed over 100 years ago!

While I would hope Americans wouldn't vote for a convicted felon, I'm not sure restricting eligibility is the answer. If felons couldn't be elected, there would be incentive for sham charges to get an opponent convicted and pushed out of the race (which, funnily enough, is what Trump fans think is happening, though he remains legally eligible to hold the office).

jmo
 
Monday, July 1st:
*Decision Expected (U.S. Supreme Court) (re Presidential Immunity) (@ 9:30am ET) - DC – Donald John Trump (77/now 78) has been indicted & charged (8/1/23) & arraigned (8/3/23) with four counts re 2020 election: conspiracy to defraud the United States "by using dishonesty, fraud & deceit to obstruct the nation’s process of collecting, counting & certifying the results of the presidential election"; 2 counts of tampering with witness, victim or an informant, conspiracy to obstruct an Official proceeding & conspiracy against rights of citizens. Plead not guilty. Personal recognizance bond.
Conditions of release: agreed to by both sides. No violations of federal law. Must appear in court as required. Must sign appearance bond. Shall not communicate about the facts of the case to any individual known to the defendant to be a witness except through attorneys. Case #23-cr-00257-TSC-1, US District Court, District of Columbia (Washington, DC)
The co-conspirators were excluded from the lawsuit. Five of the six alleged co-conspirators, based on details provided in transcripts of testimony to the Jan. 6 Committee & other records, appear to be: longtime Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani; lawyer John Eastman, who helped architect the "fake electors scheme"; attorney Sidney Powell, who helped lead Trump's post-campaign legal efforts; former Justice Dept. official Jeffrey Clark, whom Trump considered making his attorney general and Kenneth Chesebro, another attorney pushing the "fake electors scheme." It is not clear who co-conspirator 6 is, but it could be Boris Epshteyn??).
Trump's alleged role in the attack on the US Capitol on 6 January 2021, when a mob of his supporters stormed the building in an effort to stop the confirmation of President Joe Biden's election victory, is under scrutiny from several federal government bodies. The most visible has been a congressional committee that spent 18 months looking into Trump's actions. They held a series of televised hearings laying out their case that his election fraud claims led directly to the riot. Following these hearings, the committee accused Trump of inciting insurrection & other crimes.
U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan presiding. Prosecution: Thomas Windom, Molly Gulland Gaston, J.P. Cooney & James Pearce all lead attorneys. Defense attorneys: John F. Lauro, lead attorney, Emil Bove, Fitzah I. Pavalon, Pro Hac Vice, Todd Blanche, Pro Hac Vice & Attorney Will Scharf.
Trial was set to begin on 3/4/24 with jury selection has been Vacated (2/2/24) while on appeal. Appeal-denied! (2/6/24). Now awaiting U.S. Supreme Court decision. – reports say decision will be on 7/1/24.
Case info from 3/25/23 thru 2/19/24 reference post #521 here:
https://www.websleuths.com/forums/t...-1-aug-2023-trial-4-mar-2024-2.690382/page-27
2/28/24 Update: The US supreme court will decide if Trump can be prosecuted on election interference charges, indicating it will move quickly in the immunity case. Trump’s appeal to the nation’s highest court marks the final challenge he can make on the immunity issue related to his federal criminal case. The justices put on hold the criminal case being pursued by special counsel Jack Smith & will review a lower court’s rejection of Trump’s claim of immunity from prosecution because he was president when he took actions aimed at reversing Joe Biden’s election victory over him. Trump’s lawyers had requested a stay of that ruling, warning of dire consequences for the presidency absent such immunity. Oral argument set for the week of 4/22/24. That means even if the justices come to a speedy decision – say, in early May – the trial would be pushed off until mid-summer at the earliest. That might not be enough time to actually hold the trial before the election & plays right into Trump’s explicit legal strategy of trying to delay his criminal trials. The court will consider whether, and to what extent, “a former president enjoys presidential immunity from criminal prosecution for conduct alleged to involve official acts during his tenure in office”. Oral Arguments hearing was reset to 4/25/24 per The Guardian.
4/25/24 Update: After more than two hours & forty minutes of deliberations, the Supreme Court wrapped up oral arguments in the immunity claim. The court’s three liberal justices appeared skeptical of the arguments brought by John Sauer, Trump’s attorney, but at least some of the six conservatives on the bench seemed open to his requests. A majority of justices on the US Supreme Court expressed interest in sending Trump’s DC criminal case back down to a lower court to decide whether certain parts of the indictment were “official acts” protected by presidential immunity. That move would all but guarantee that Trump’s federal trial doesn’t happen before the 2024 election. It is unclear when the court could rule, and until it does, Trump’s federal trial in Washington, DC, being prosecuted by special counsel Jack Smith, remains on hold, with the 2024 presidential election racing towards us. [see post #532, page 27, thread #2 article].
6/29/24 Update: The Supreme Court is expected on Monday, 7/1/24 to issue its ruling on Trump's bid for immunity from prosecution in the federal election subversion case.
 
https://twitter.com/x/status/1807785021517771109


@AnthonyMKreis

"The indictment’s allegations that Trump attempted to pressure the Vice President to take particular acts in connection with his role at the certification proceeding thus involve official conduct, and Trump is at least presumptively immune from prosecution for such conduct."

"The indictment’s remaining allegations involve Trump’s interactions with persons outside the Executive Branch: state officials, private parties, and the general public." These issues must be remanded to the District Court for further inspection.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1807783473786061201

https://twitter.com/x/status/1807785577049420286

 
Last edited:
It's a presumptive immunity for official acts of the Eecutive Branch of government. For example, former president Obama would not be able to be criminally charged for the decision to kill an American citizen overseas. Acting in his official role, he is giving presumptive immunity. Also, motive is irrelevant according to this Supreme Court opinion, in cases of presidential immunity.

It's a good ruling, clarifies immunity for the executive branch of government under the U.S. Constitution. Now the case will be returned to the lower court and they will have to review charges based on the Supreme Court's ruling. I imagine there will be lots of motions, appeals, etc by both sides and some charges will be dropped and/or added and it will continue to be reviewed by the higher courts.

Constiutional legal experts are still reviewing the 96-page Supreme Court Opinion written by Chief Justice John Roberts.
 
Last edited:
From what I'm reading, it just kicks it back to the lower court to decide which of his crimes are "official acts". It could have been much worse. They could have decided that trying to overturn the results of an election is considered an "official act". OTOH, a lower court may rule that its an "official act", which could go back to the SCOTUS to decide if that specific act is an official act. Or it may not, the ruling in the lower court may stand. It's terrifying and sickening and I'm really tired of all of it.
 
In my opinion, what Trump wants is to be made a king, a king with all the powers to do whatever he wants, no matter what, and to answer to no one.

I'm afraid that if he gets back in, he'll try to find a way to stay President for life, and then hand it on to his children.
 
TootsieFootsie said:
I don't know if that is saying he has immunity or not.
Click to expand...
Exactly. I think it means that any prosecution will forever be tied up in courts to determine what is official and unofficial duties while in office.

(Of course, I hope we never go through the process of prosecuting another ex-president ever again.)

jmo
 
TootsieFootsie said:
In my opinion, what Trump wants is to be made a king, a king with all the powers to do whatever he wants, no matter what, and to answer to no one.

I'm afraid that if he gets back in, he'll try to find a way to stay President for life, and then hand it on to his children.
Click to expand...
Happy 4th of July, America.

:(

jmo
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 221 more.
Total: 1,937 (members: 222, guests: 1,715)

Online statistics

Members online
222
Guests online
1,715
Total visitors
1,937
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
598,227
Messages
18,077,696
Members
230,569
Latest member
jamieleeds
Back
Top