General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIn Immunity Case, Trump Can Lose in Ways That Amount to a Win (NYT)
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/24/us/trump-immunity-case-supreme-court.htmlhttps://archive.ph/ji7QM
In Immunity Case, Trump Can Lose in Ways That Amount to a Win
After the justices hear arguments on Thursday, how they decide may be just as important as what they decide.
By Adam Liptak
April 24, 2024
...
One involves the timing of the courts decision, which has received substantial attention given the relatively leisurely pace it has set for itself in the case. Even if Mr. Trump eventually and categorically loses, each passing week makes it more challenging for Jack Smith, the special counsel in the case, to complete the trial before the election.
The other, which has received less consideration but is no less important, is the possibility that the courts ruling, even if issued promptly, will inject additional legal complications into the case that will take time to sort out.
The Supreme Court is unlikely to embrace the broadest version of Mr. Trumps argument: that all of this was official conduct that cannot be the subject of a criminal prosecution. But the case is complicated enough that the justices may not issue a definitive ruling.
That is what happened in 2020, when another case involving Mr. Trump reached the justices just months before a presidential election. The question was similar to the one the court will consider on Thursday: whether Mr. Trump was entitled to a form of absolute presidential immunity allowing him to block prosecutors from obtaining his tax records.
In July 2020, Mr. Trump lost the case. But the loss was a kind of victory. The court sent the case back to the lower courts for more analysis, running out the clock.
...
617Blue
(1,281 posts)dalton99a
(81,590 posts)617Blue
(1,281 posts)it's like they read the NYT Pitchbot and said how can we twist this headline to own the libs.
Yesterday they informed us that their polling says that men think Dump respects women.
onenote
(42,767 posts)If it can and possibly will happen, how is the Times "trolling us" by reporting that fact?
617Blue
(1,281 posts)Everything's a win for Dump. How about - Conservative SC justices aiding Trump with delays.
onenote
(42,767 posts)Keep in mind that the Government's brief before the Supreme Court specifically addresses the possibility that the Court will find that former presidents have immunity for "official acts" and discusses how that should impact the trial going forward.
617Blue
(1,281 posts)And frankly I don't give a fuck about the bullshit the SC hands down. GOP operatives in black robes.
Knock yourself out trying to untangle their pretzel logic - but do it quick because they'll contradict themselves as soon as it serves them.
onenote
(42,767 posts)If I find a source that reports exactly the same thing -- and there plenty -- should I disbelieve them? Is it fake news because its not what you want to hear?
Should I add NBC and the Washington Post to the sources that are actually "trolls""
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/trump-win-supreme-court-immunity-argument-rcna148384
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/04/24/trump-supreme-court-immunity-dc-trial/
To be clear, I hope Smith prevails and if the Court sends the case back to the district court for more fact finding, they agree with Smith that it can be done during the trial and doesn't have to be handled in pre-trial proceedings.
The Harvey Weinstein convictions were just reversed by the New York appeals court -- should serve as a reminder that the outcome of Trump's trials is in doubt until they are not.
617Blue
(1,281 posts)I'm talking about the undeniably biased tone in the NYT coverage.
onenote
(42,767 posts)617Blue
(1,281 posts)MiHale
(9,779 posts)With all his cases all thats ever going to happen is delay, appeal, delay, appeal, delay, delay.
Hes 77 years old. Hell die before any closure
unless he appeals that
then delays.
gab13by13
(21,405 posts)This appeal has nothing to do with immunity, it has everything to do with getting Trump to trial.
The SC only took 1 month to get Trump back on the Colorado ballot.
onenote
(42,767 posts)how is it BS? Is there something factually wrong in the article?
TwilightZone
(25,485 posts)Which was clearly addressed in the first paragraph of the excerpt. Helps to actually read it.
Aristus
(66,462 posts)headlines.