President Trump has asked the Supreme Court to allow the legal arguments with presidential immunity to follow the traditional path through the appeals court [pdf court filing]. Special Prosecutor Jack Smith wants to sidestep the appeals court and go directly to the Supreme Court for resolution.
As noted by Politico, President Trump’s lawyers “repeatedly warning the justices to avoid “haste,” Trump’s lawyers skewered Smith for taking extraordinary steps to preserve the March 4, 2024, trial date without detailing why taking the case to a jury just over two months from now is so critical.” In essence, Jack Smith is trying to force a fast trial on schedule to gain maximum interference with the GOP primary election, while Trump’s lawyers are calling him out for it.
Jack Smith filed a response to the Trump filing, again reasserting, “the public interest in a prompt resolution of this case favors an immediate, definitive decision by this court. The charges here are of the utmost gravity. This case involves — for the first time in our nation’s history — criminal charges against a former president based on his actions while in office. And not just any actions: alleged acts to perpetuate himself in power by frustrating the constitutionally prescribed process for certifying the lawful winner of an election,” wrote Mr. Smith. “The nation has a compelling interest in a decision.”
Smith is worried the appeals court arguments and final decision will extend beyond the 2024 term of the Supreme Court, setting up a lengthy continuation of the DC case against Trump into October and November of 2024. Trump’s team is saying the issues before the court are unprecedented and careful deliberation is needed.
To support the position of Donald Trump, 19 states filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court today [pdf Here].
[…] “In 234 years of American history, no President ever faced criminal prosecution for his official acts. Until 19 days ago, no court had ever addressed whether immunity from such prosecution exists. To this day, no appellate court has addressed it. The question stands among the most complex, intricate, and momentous issues that this Court will be called on to decide.
This Court’s ordinary review procedures will allow the D.C. Circuit to address this appeal in the first instance, thus granting this Court the benefit of an appellate court’s prior consideration of these historic topics and performing the traditional winnowing function that this Court has long preferred. Indeed, the D.C. Circuit has already granted highly expedited review of President Trump’s appeal over President Trump’s opposition, with briefing to be concluded by January 2, 2024, and oral argument scheduled for January 9, 2024.
The Special Counsel urges this Court to bypass those ordinary procedures, including the longstanding preference for prior consideration by at least one court of appeals, and rush to decide the issues with reckless abandon. The Court should decline that invitation at this time, for several reasons. (read more, pdf)
Making matters more complex for the high court to review, former Attorney General Edwin Meese III and law professors Steven G Calabresi and Gary S Lawson have filed a briefing as Amici Curiae (friend of the court, not connected to either party), [pdf HERE] challenging the legitimacy of the Biden appointed special counsel, Jack Smith.
[SOURCE]
Regardless of whether the Supreme Court wants to weigh in on these issues, they are going to have to respond. This is in addition to the Supreme Court ultimately having to determine how the insufferable Colorado Lawfare ruling is going to stand.
The Roberts led Supreme Court does not like issues involving the political dynamic; however, on these two issues they are likely going to have to choose. If they deny the Jack Smith request, the trial of Donald Trump could be delayed until the resolution of presidential immunity ultimately reaches them (after appellate court review). However, there is a strong possibility the appeals court will side with President Trump, and the appeal to SCOTUS will then come from Jack Smith.
FJS and the EV he rode in on
Where’s a lithium battery fire when you need one?
Here you go…………..
https://www.breitbart.com/economy/2023/12/20/fire-shuts-down-gms-electric-car-plant-executives-blame-battery-materials/
“remotely authorized the appoint- ment by the Attorney General of a private citizen to receive extraordinary criminal law enforcement power under the title of Special Counsel.”
Are they saying that Jack Smith does not have the legal authority to prosecute President Trump, let alone petition SCOTUS?
This is getting very interesting. So his job as “Special Counsel” was only to investigate…..
Do you mean his electric Stingray?
La Dem Nikkita 29, Trump 33 in NH. Really? WTH?
Not a chance.
Nikkita 9, Trump 53
More like it
Not according to these lugnuts.
https://americanresearchgroup.com/pres2024/rep/nhrep.html
Who gets the other 38%, lol.
Lol, it better be Trump!
This is the wrong thread. And those are the wrong numbers.
https://americanresearchgroup.com/pres2024/rep/nhrep.html
Derp.
off topic much?
I don’t believe that. Now it appears to be Nikki’s turn to have an astro turd campaign with fake poll numbers as DeSantis flames out. Nikki seems to be the new establishment wanna be globalist favorite.
Both parties want anyone but President Trump.
We want TRUMP more than ever. He is a fighter.
Trump 2024
There are no polls that are reliable with both sides trying to shock pollsters. Tie that into cable news & the talking heads, you end up with squat.
VP Harris is embarking on a tour across the country to gather Democrat support on nationalizing abortion rights. THAT is the biggest & only issue that gives Democrats & FJB 100% support no matter where they go.
It is, IMHAO, the issue that gets our indoctrinated young voters out to vote. When you combine that with RINOs efforts (or anti-America efforts), it has stopped “red waves” in 2018, 2020 & 2022. Along with “abortion rights,” comes normalizing the LGBTQXYZ community, which Harris campaigned on before she dropped out of the primaries.
Our indoctrinated youth are primed for defeating old farts. Pollsters are simply unaware of what the young indoctrinated voters care about. They might not “like” Bidenomics, but they hate America. Pollsters assume everyone loves America. They are wrong & out-of-touch. IMHAO
most polls are fakery, propaganda… Pay them Zero attention.
Logic tells us the majority of the nation is with Trump 100%
We are all well aware of poll fakery and their attempts at driving a narrative.
But sometimes they’re right.
Please….Think. THINK. Has ANY OTHER POLL that’s been published come anywhere even CLOSE to those numbers? That “poll” is pure unadulterated fabricated manure-laden nonsense intended to distract and confuse people who are only half awake and not thinking clearly.
Look up scumbag in the dictionary and there are two pictures. Jack Smith and Rob De Santeece
Three. Mrs. Camo Tiara should be in there as well.
There is an annual addition of scumbag. Including Mary, her husband, his former boss, Valery, Mo, her husband, Brennan et al, kancles, her husband, everyone on those flight logs with her husband, the three letter consortium, press pass club.
Just a good start to the local levels.
Heads we win, tails they lose.
since when? Washington Generals win more than gop wusses do. I predict the future by studying the past, gop snatches defeat from jaws of victory. Need a dirty bastard like Lee Atwater bad.
The Supreme Court is in a lose/lose position.
As I see it, Chief Justice Roberts has an explicitly political choice to make. Protect the remaining reputation of the Supreme Court by ruling favorably to President Trump and thoroughly infuriate the lawfare crowd at their expense, or go along with the plot and set the precedence that gives the 4th Branch the effective power to destroy anyone for their official lawful actions in office.
The Supreme Court led by Chief Justice Roberts has more or less put themselves in this predicament with their more controversial and inherently political rulings in recent years.
I do not envy the Supreme Court. They can choose to continue to be a part of the problem or be a part of the solution. The time is over for their fence sitting.
Many times, I have longed for Lee to come back!
Jack is in such a hurry that he waited 3 years to bring the case.
“America is all about speed. Hot, nasty, bad ass speed.” Eleanor Roosevelt, 1936 😉
Jacksputin the Mad Monk of Mendacity is having a bad day.
I’m sure the Hague will have him, after they free Jacksputin’s prisoner there will be a cell available for him.
“Special Prosecutor Jack Smith wants to sidestep the appeals court and go directly to the Supreme Court for resolution.”
Maybe I am missing something, but why is Jerk acting so confident that SCOTUS will give him the ruling he wants?
If I were the Supremes, I would never step on the toes of the court that PREPARES cases for them…
The Appellate Court.
<If I were the Supremes, I would never step on the toes of the court…>
Nothing But Heartaches 🙂
And the fact that Jack Smith is imploring them to do exactly that should send clear signals about his respect for the institution…. or rather complete lack of respect in deference to his own ambitions.
Ambitions or fears?
Probably both. The two are frequently associated…..
There is a shadow that has been hanging over the Supreme Court for more than 150 years– the 1857 Dred Scott decision. John Roberts is many things, but above all he sees himself as Chief Justice as the custodian of the court’s historical reputation. He will tread very cautiously here because he does not want to go into the history books as the guy who delivered a Dred Scott for the 21st century.
” He will tread very cautiously here because he does not want to go into the history books as the guy who delivered a Dred Scott for the 21st century.”
That’s a logical argument.
However, Roberts has to be fully aware the democrat media will fully cover him for getting rid of Trump.
I have no trust in Roberts.
None.
Agree. He’s the guy that refused to hear a case that, if ever there was a case called to be laid in the wheelhouse of the SC under Article III Section II, it was TX v. PA coming out of the 2020 election. He blew it off with a Catch-22 rationale that an 8-year old could see through. He doesn’t do this kind of stuff on every case, but that guy, imo, is owned.
Obama care anyone?
He also does not want to be exposed and arrested for child trafficking (think the 2 Irish children that he “adopted.”) So there’s that also.
He already did with Obama care being a “tax”, not insurance. If I remember that hair splitting correctly.
John Roberts worries me.
He gave us Obamacare.
Stop worrying. You know he is badly compromised and corrupt. Of course he will make every attempt to hurt President Trump, unless he sees a worse downside from not joining the majority. This seems to be a fairly clear decision to make and he has to think about how petty and ridiculous he’ll appear to be if he decides in favor of Smith or Colorado.
Of course a man willing to call Obamacare a tax might just be able to convince himself that any decision he makes is reasonable. So there’s that.
we should be worried about Roberts and others
on the supreme court
Maybe I am missing something…
answer: sundance provides the answer, but allow me to follow up with expanding notes.
BE UNAFRAID.
IT WILL NOT WORK
God Bless America
All the court has to do is schedule a hearing via regular order for Smith’s deadline to get shot down. I look for the court to postpone wading into this thicket for as long as possible, letting events render the whole issue moot.
Excellent analysis. I hope you’re right.
Analysis only seen on CTH.
Thank you!
Great and best analysis I’ve read. Especially if Appellate Court rules it’s gives SCOTUS the out ….
#1 〕If Smith gets a ruling in his favor, he no longer need prevail on the facts at the trial level,
#2 it makes it easier for every state to have a reason to keep Trump off the ballot, &
#3 Smith will likely amend or add counts against Trump on directly conducting an insurrection.
Trump can’t get immunity for anything he did before or after the 2020 election if Smith gets his way with the Supremes.
It’s kinda like what happened to Trump in NY when Judge Endrogan granted summary judgment against Trump for AG James. She never had the obligation to prove Trump committed fraud to begin with under a “consumer protection” law in which Trump is arguably the “consumer. (this is a civil action, not criminal)
This is how you subvert the presumption of innocence & due process.
Hubris.
“………..Jack Smith is trying to force a fast trial on schedule to gain maximum interference………………..”
What part about election interference is so hard to understand. Can it be any more obvious? Or maybe that type of behavior acceptable now? If it weren’t for double standards they would have no standards at all.
Clearly it is only acceptable behavior by Dems deeeep stte. They interfered in the 2020 election by censoring information regarding the FJB crime family. 30% of the people that voted for FJB said that if they had known the corruption information in the Laptop From Hell was real they would not have voted for him. They ALL got away with it. Blinken, the architect of the Lie, and 51 intelligence officers all got away with. Heck, Blinken even gets to be SoS.
Can the republicans who brought the suit in Colorado be sued civilly for depriving others the right to choose their candidate freely ?
“But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States…is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, …the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.” (14th Amendment, Section 2)
I am not a lawyer. And this clause of the 14th is considered to be moot because it applied only to the post Civil War era. But Section 3 which the Colorado court used was also considered moot for the same reason. I would contend that any Colorado voter who wanted to vote for Trump but was denied has cause to sue in federal court and to ask that Colorado be stripped of electoral college votes as a result. That WOULD get their attention!
I am not either! I just wonder if so that might be discourage future frivilous claims! Thank you
Nice!
The Colorado case against Trump was brought by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), headed by President and CEO Noah Bookbinder…
?itok=KBFrSKE3Noah Bookbinder
…who sits on the Biden administration’s Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Advisory Council (HSAC), as the Daily Caller‘s James Lynch reports.
“Our Constitution clearly states that those who violate their oath by attacking our democracy are barred from serving in government. It has been an honor to represent the petitioners, and we look forward to ensuring that this vitally important ruling stands,” Bookbinder gloated in a press release.
It gets better…
Isn’t that group a non profit? And isn’t it illegal for a nonprofit to bring legal actions regarding politics?
I don’t see that being aggressively pursued by Republicans, unless I missed it.
I read the amicus brief and it seems plain to me that Jack the Ripper Smith is not legally appointed to be a special council. The DOJ went way beyond what they were legally allowed to do when Garland chose to give the power to prosecute President Trump to a private citizen like Jack Smith!! It was illegal from the get go!
SPIT! And he’s not worth THAT much!
Since all this lawfare BS is based on pure trash, of course their fluffy legal maneuvering has to be loud and kept front and center for media consumption. They have to be exceptionally ignorant or desperate to not notice PDTs support increases every time they try to pull another communist maneuver.
Jack Smith reminds me of the evil General Zod in Superman.
Or Ming the Merciless way back in the days of Flash Gordon!
Daniel Plainview in There Will Be Blood.
He reminds me of Dr. Evil in Austin Powers.
Jack smith the lawfare punk, who only knows activist tactics. As corrupt as he is, very doubtful that he follows lawful options. He has a much better understanding of corruption, since that’s what he practices.
“But perhaps the most damning and dismissive statement of Smith’s unconstitutional appointment comes from the text of the brief itself stating that “Not clothed in the authority of the federal government, Smith is a modern example of the naked emperor. Improperly appointed, he has no more authority to represent the United States in this Court than Bryce Harper, Taylor Swift, or Jeff Bezos.”
https://trendingpoliticsnews.com/former-u-s-attorney-general-special-counsel-jack-smiths-appointment-is-unconstitutional-mhollow/?utm
Man o’ man, Taylor Swift is everywhere, and in interesting company. 🙂
Taylor Swift is “dumb as a box of rocks”
along with her pfizer supporter boyfriend
that doesn’t mean they aren’t super talented
in their own career fields – just, please don’t
elevate them outside of that
i can understand young people being supporters
I went to considerable trouble years ago to get tickets to her
concert for pre teen granddaughters
however, adults up to the age of 40’s-50’s
are now known as a “swifties” supporters who
go to concerts and her movie of her concert
and have her outline in Christmas lights on
their front lawns.
absolute insanity
I would be interested in knowing how Sundance has come to the conclusion that “there is a strong possibility the appeals court will side with President Trump”.
Aren’t we talking about the DC Appeals Court?
as tough as the CO court that said we won but if we lost its okay cause we lied that we won.
Public interest in prompt resolution isn’t a thing, Jack.
Public interest in a fair thing is more real but also not a thing.
Read the Constitution.
Come on man, it’s like the prompt resolution for those in the J6 Gulag.
oops…I just saw that I said the same thing you said. Well …it was worth saying again…
How about prompt resolution – as mandated by the Constitution – for the J6 prisoners???
This makes me sofa king ANGRY.
“The Supreme Court will have to respond.” That same thing was said when multiple States challenged the Un-Constitutional changes other States made to election laws prior to the 2020 election. SCOTUS is supposed to have Original Jurisdiction on disputes between States. But they just punted.
Never underestimate the fecklessness of John Roberts.
and some of the rest of them
But, but, but…it feelzzzz like Jackboot Smith should be allowed to go after Hitler Orangeman say the Totalitarians for Our Democracy.
No sympathy for the court, least of all its chief justice.
“The Robert’s led supreme court does not like issues involving the political dynamic”
That’s why they will demand that the Appeals Court hears this first.
I’m telling you all, they are going after SCOTUS.
They know all these cases will end up at the SC. It’s why they are doing. If the SC rules anything that favors Trump, the justices will be targeted from all angles. Wouldn’t surprise me if we see the return of the Antifa Shock Troops.
They already tried to get rid of Thomas this year.
At least once!
so what?
dont you want to address the power of the Court?
use these punks, for your uses.
That’s 2024 and beyond. Antifa riots across the nation as soon as it gets warm enough….
Wonder when our military
age “new arrivals” get involved?
It will be like what we in the Dallas service industry call the big ugly. Daylight savings time adjustment at 2 AM back to 1 AM & for an extra hour of drinking.
This time it will take at least ten years to get all the barflies to go home.
Agreed.
The CO Supreme Court shenanigans serve to diminish faith in all the black robes countrywide. They know they are out of line and don’t care. True agents of chaos. Mission accomplished.
BRIEF OF FORMER ATTORNEY GENERAL EDWIN MEESE III AND LAW PROFESSORS STEVEN G. CALABRESI AND GARY S. LAWSON AS AMICI CURIAE SUPPORTING NEITHER PARTY
“Not clothed in the authority of the federal government, Smith is a modern example of the naked emperor. Improperly appointed, he has no more authority to represent the United States in this Court than Bryce Harper, Taylor Swift, or Jeff Bezos. That fact is sufficient to sink Smith’s petition, and the Court should deny review. We express no views on the merits issues addressed in Smith’s unauthorized petition”
https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-624/293864/20231220140217967_US%20v.%20Trump%20amicus%20final.pdf
Sundance,
Can you opine on the strength of the argument made about the appointment of Smith?
This seems like a path which President Trump should have argued himself and from day one. His lack of effort causes me to question the validity of the argument. However, the logic seems sound enough for SCOTUS to hang their hat on to avoid ruling on the merits of The Presidents case.
We know Roberts always looks for a way to avoid conflict and this might be the ticket. Unless his name is on the Epstein list…just saying.
Its just my opinion, but I doubt Roberts would blow up everything Jerk has done to date by ruling he was appointed improperly.
What other problems would arise far beyond Trump if that were the ruling?
The easiest way for him to weasel out of this is to rule it should be heard in the appeals court first. It puts the heat back on them, then it would likely delay action until after the election, and in the end become moot.
The writers of that particular amicus include a former Attorney General of the United States, and legal scholars who have been cited as authorities in past decisions by the Supreme Court. So, yes, what they are saying here is quite valid, and will be read as such.
Probably the best AG this country had since the creation of that office.
Just a little side note, according to the AP (Associated Press), the Supreme Court is scheduled to meet next on January 5, 2024 … there goes the Colorado Supreme Court’s attempt to keep Trump off the ballot.
In this SCOTUS filing [1] Special Counsel Jack Smith (and Michael Dreeben among others) wrote (p 2):
“The public interest in a prompt resolution of this case favors an immediate, definitive decision by this Court”.
While the 6th amendment gives criminal defendant(s) the right to a speedy & public trial, no constitutional provision exists for the prosecution accelerating the timeline or leapfrogging the appellate process.
[1] 20231221105032440_United States v. Trump_CBJ Reply.pdf (supremecourt.gov)
is he asking to be able to skip timelines
in the sense of skipping appeal court: Yes
does that indicate he needs a conviction before? or he prefers the messaging that way?
In short (for federal indictments):
President Trump’s goal is that every trial starts AFTER 2024 Presidential Election, DOJ’s goal is next March (DC) and next May (FL). While it looks like that there is no pressure in FL (review of timeline next March), DC timeline mainly depends on SCOTUS. Right now it looks like odds are in favour of President Trump. As there is the unwritten, informal 60 days period when the DOJ traditionally avoids significant public steps that might influence – or give the appearance of trying to influence – the election, a trial shouldn’t start after 9/24.
A delay is incredible important because the time the trial starts he had to be present in DC courtroom four or five days a week, which prevents him to be on the campaign trial. If there is no trial, there is no conviction and no burden!
so is it that the Jack smith guy is trying to get a trial early, or just the messaging of immunity?
if no trial can come before the election then it looks like its just messaging
Jack Smith is the metaphorical reincarnation of Thomas de Torquemad.
Hopefully, before this is through, Jackazz will be reduced to Thomas de Tank Engine.
Don’t insult Thomas the Tank Engine!!!
Smith not only wants a speedy trial against the rights of the defendant, but also wants this case because it supercedes other cases, violating equal and fair due process under the law.
you need to make this comment in the largest font and bold possible.
people need to understand what DOJ is attempting to get the courts to recognize!
and while this will have an impact on 2024, President Trump and YOU AND ME, THE PEOPLE, there is far greater consequences to a ruling that would allow the DOJ to assert a higher power to determine eligibility for candidates.
it’s not going to stop at President Trump.
when your enemy says a thing, believe them.
they want to control the election…they have said it and done it in perfect english.
now they just want scotus to give them precedent rulings to make it normalized.
2028 headlines: the DOJ has announced the following candidates will be permitted to run for office and here are the names.
absurd you say…check yourself…this EXACTLY what the agenda is. It’s so much easier that to defraud and election with mules, digital crimes and ballot stuffing. think about how the secret police spy state operates…each iteration it grabs more and more power…away from you and transfer that power to the “invisible hand”…
God Bless America
Ironically, this is what has happened in Hong Kong since the Chicom takeover in ’97. Next year’s election will feature a grand total of one anointed candidate. It looks like the Left has decided to go all in on the PRC model.
corrupted power has no borderlines.
These people are despicable to the utmost and deserve whatever they get – after a fair trial, of course.
It would be nice when the SCOTUS rules against Smith for wanting a speedy trial, that they take note that the same DOJ has left some J6ers hanging without a trial for almost 3 years.
Smith wants a speedy trial but the DOJ waited 3 years to after President Trump.
I always thought the wheels of justice were designed to grind slowly. Jack Smith needs to be careful not to get his appendage caught in them while pressing the accelerator button.
Already seems like a eunuch to me.
I second that motion.
Roberts would be wise to make it Easy for SCOTUS by backing Ed Meese’s play and sending Jack Smith back to the showers,…. hence, no more Supreme hassles from Jack,… AND,… the House could then Impeach AG, Garland for illegally appointing Smith sans Congressional approval.
Win/Win?
True. But the invites to the cocktail circuit might become scarce.
That’s the best option for Trump, as Both the DC and Florida cases would disappear, having been brought by no legally authorized person. But anyone who thinks that John Roberts would be bold enough to do that doesn’t know anything about John Roberts.
How beneficial would it be to have someone on the Supreme Court that could be blackmailed? Someone inline to make a decision on an important case.
———————–
Maxine Waters Confirms Obama’s role
“Obama is leaving in place a database on everything on every individual.”
———————–
Then who would have the power to access the NSA database whenever needed? In order to take down President Trump.
———————–
Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, who was hand-picked by President Joe Biden to make good on a campaign promise, has been accused of two violations of ethics.
Jackson was nominated by Biden last year after he promised in 2020 that race and gender would be his guide to the next court vacancy. “I’m looking forward to making sure there’s a black woman on the Supreme Court to make sure we in fact get everyone represented,” he said then, according to The New York Times. Jackson was confirmed in April 2022 by a 53-47 vote in the Senate, with three Republicans joining all 50 Democrats.
https://www.westernjournal.com/ethics-complaint-filed-supreme-court-justice-ketanji-brown-jackson-two-potential-violations/?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=conservative-brief-WJ&utm_campaign=dailypm&utm_content=western-journal
—————-
The pro-pedophile judge is currently on track to become Biden’s pick for the Supreme Court. Ketanji Brown Jackson has a long track record of supporting child rapists and condoning pedophilia, according to reports.
https://thepeoplesvoice.tv/judge-who-labelled-pizzagate-a-conspiracy-was-scotus-nominee-ketanji-jackson/
So why would any President want someone supporting child rapists and condoning pedophilia?
non issue. database access versus database accesss..
Can a Supreme Court judge be fired by the president?
All “Article III judges” are nominated by a president and confirmed by the Senate. They “hold their office during good behavior” with lifetime appointments except in limited circumstances. Under Article I, Congress is given the authority to hold impeachment proceedings against all such federal judges.
I don’t know, would it be important to hold this information in a secure place?
economic hitman can reel in any operators and make them fat happy nobodies.
“How beneficial would it be to have someone on the Supreme Court that could be blackmailed? Someone inline to make a decision on an important case.”
There were many cases coming to the Roberts Court on Obama’s eligibility before he was sworn in – including Leo Donofrio’s. Yet Roberts violated all protocols and met with Obama in private. Unprecedented. Did Obama show up to remind Roberts………………of something?
—————————
January 15, 2009
“CBS News reported that Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, John G. Roberts, Jr., would meet in private with impostor president elect, Barack Hussein Obama aka Barry Soetoro and so forth, on January 14, 2009:
“At the invitation of Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., Mr. Obama and Vice President-elect Joe Biden will pay a protocol visit to the Supreme Court of the United States Wednesday afternoon, the office says….The visit is private; reporters and photographers will not be present.”
I called the media number at the Supreme Court yesterday afternoon. The giddy operator confirmed they expected Obama at any minute!
To say I was floored when I read the news item is an understatement. A ‘ceremonial’ meeting between a president elect and justices of the Supreme Court is somewhat traditional. HOWEVER, in this instance, it’s flat out wrong. Chief Justice Roberts has cases on the docket where Obama is the defendant or is the subject of the litigation. Roberts and the other eight justices have already held two ‘Distribution for Conferences’ on the Donofrio and Wrotnoski cases on Obama’s citizenship ineligibility. They just turned away one of Phil Berg’s cases a few days ago; that one is still in the Third Circuit. Tomorrow is the fourth case; another from Phil Berg.
On Wednesday, Roberts meets with the man at the heart of that case in private. Two days later, he sits down to discuss the case with the other justices after having a closed door meeting with the defendant! There is still the Lightfoot v Bowen case to be heard in conference, January 23, 2009. Again, Chief Justice Roberts will sit in that private meeting to discuss whether the case should go to oral arguments.
Does anyone see major conflict of interest here? How can Chief Justice Roberts meet with Obama behind closed doors under such circumstances? Even if they just chatted up the weather, it is highly inappropriate in my humble opinion. Roberts should have notified Obama that under the circumstances, he would not be able to meet with him, private or with photogs in attendance. There must be zero appearance of any bias or preference when it comes to judges and justices of the Supreme Court.”
https://newswithviews.com/Devvy/kidd428.htm
4.0+
A bit like meetings in planes on the airport tarmac… familiar?
Retrospectively it causes eyeball wide open concern as Biden was there….
Joe isn’t just any president
Paxton 2.0 response from Supreme Dictatorship Court?
I cannot find the listing of the 19 states that filed the amicus brief today.
I read the pdf and it does not name the states and I cannot find the page listing the AG’s…
I did not read all 34 pages but scanned…..
I know, I’m sloppy….
Ha, you know more than most
HA!
I just wanted to see if GA’s AG Chrissy Carr signed on………prolly not!
But I would like to see the list of AG’s.
Normally they are listed separately at the beginning of the brief…at least on those I’ve read in the past
I did notice that the links Sundance posted, were the same pdf’s…and they were from the Trump attorneys.
See the last page of the brief for all the signatories.
Thanks, I did….
It was Trump’s attorneys.
But I will go back and double-check again
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/F_FmAAmXMAEocQN?format=jpg&name=large
Found this on a link to X from Troublemaker…posted below…and it was from Missouri’s AG Bailey ..
Bottom line; GA AG Carr was not on the list…so the scam continues in Georgia with Kemp and the boys, bought and paid for by Chyna!
Was there any doubt?
I couldn’t find it either.
Here’s a tweet that lists all 19:
Thanks!
You can see the list here:
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/12/trump-urges-scotus-reject-jack-smith-request-expedited/
General Flynn weighs in.
https://truthsocial.com/@TrueGenFlynn/posts/111612960654737118
Given the gravity of the current U. S. invasion, this might be like arguing over whether or not to throw chairs off the Titanic.
Military aged Russian males are crossing at all three ports of entry in El Paso.
Military aged Chinese males are pouring through the port of entry in Tucson.
Venezuelan and Nicaraguan former prison inmates are pouring into other parts of Texas each day.
Texas is running two dozen busses a day into other states where these guys toss their cell phones and then dissappear.
2024 will make for some interesting stories.
I keep saying 2024 won’t happen.
I know that seems like a broad statement, but it’s not. There must be a reason beyond just ideological. It’s part of the plan. No other way this happens.
As someone had stated yesterday, why are the D Rats so terrified of Trump if China Joe had gotten 81 million legitimate votes last time.
THAT is a very good question.
jack Smith is filth.
That’s an insult to filth!
Dear God, please make the insanity stop. Amen.
When men forget God, he takes away their reason and morals. See Romans 1.
How do you then, explain Human History? Evil has always been in/with us, and millions of Humans have, since the beginnings of human history ignored Reason and Morals… (morals changing with “the times”.
And they all died. Individually, human history is about whether or not each of us obtains the cure for death, also known as the last enemy to be destroyed.
I’m betting Jack Smith has been mandated a deadline to have simultaneous court victories against Trump to coincide with the DNC convention August 19th. And if he fails, never to be spoken of again….
I really digging Professors Calebresi and Lawson 🙂 I’m pretty sure that pissed off Jack LOL
Frankly, courts across the land could have stopped all of this nonsense long ago.
Instead, no standing came the mantra from the courts.
The result, an out of control freight train is barreling down on the Supreme Court.
This won’t end well I do believe.
Thanks!
I was looking for this; it’s not linked in Sundance’s post.
The desperation of the FJB crew is frightening as they attempt to take out not just our President Trump, but his lawyers and supporters as well.
Look at what they just did to Rudy- bankrupted him and destroyed his life on the basis of those 2 lowlife election fraudsters, oops, meant to say “workers.”
The courts and judges have become a sick joke and I am afraid that even the Supremes may be on the wrong side of these issues. At the very least I doubt that they will have the courage to do what needs to be done.
I honestly don’t know how our President has the strength to go through what he does on a daily basis. He is the ONLY true leader on the world stage today in this struggle between good and pure evil. It is long past time for ALL the Republicans and conservatives to get off their asses and stand up for our magnificent President. If not, then they should rot in hell with their DemonRat accomplices.
There is no rule of law anymore. Only what the so called elites allow or do not allow. Just as bad is that the U.S. can no longer be thought of as a serious society. The system hangs on by force and fear. That is always the path of empires in their late stages. The foreign elites are fearful but they are fearful of the wrong things.
The primary imperative followed by the elites now is that the white race is evil and must be eradicated. Trump is the personification of this. So the one group who might be able to maintain the country as a first world society is being attacked as an enemy. I give the U.S. as an intact political entity until the mid 2030s but that might be optimistic.
There are no Republicans. There is only the Uniparty.
I am afraid America is becoming like a potato plant. The best parts of it, the Founding Fathers and the U.S. Constitution and it’s Bill of Rights, are underground.
When Trump prevails from all of this contrived BS the Dems will say that he was saved by a friendly SC that he appointed. So they win with their base at least.
Smith should know by now that he is on the losing side, illegitimately appointed by an AG who wanted a sacrificial “goon,” and that his own career is finished.
In his so-called “brief,” Smith does nothing more than re-state the accusations that a sitting President, tasked by the Constitution(!) to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed,” was somehow breaking the law by saying that he believed that [the Federal felony crime of …] “election fraud” had been committed, and by urging others to take appropriate actions (each within their own powers) to address the issue.
In the eyes of the Constitution, the sitting President – the Executive Branch – was acting in his official capacity and following the mandates of Article 2 as he saw them.
This sort of “re-accusation” isn’t going to go anywhere with the SCOTUS, even if he had (which he has not …) the legal power to bring a case directly to them. Over the past two hundred years, the Supreme Court has ruled many times and in many ways, always in favor of Article 2 and the person whom it describes and singularly empowers. These fundamental decisions are the stuff of first-year law school classes.
I agree.
The Supreme Court has a reputation to consider and, sad to say, politics is part of that reality.
With an unprecedented issue such as this, Chief Justice Roberts cannot hide under his desk and ignore it, nor can he cower and be afraid of the possible backlash.
These government attorneys are really not as smart as they pretend and it only takes a little bit of common sense to figure it out.
In the real world, if an attorney is intelligent, competent, polite, respectful, has high level work ethics, he/she is busy, busy, busy and making a lot of $$’s… There is no need to look toward the government to hire them or for that matter any public service at all. They can donate their time to certain types of cases, many attorneys do that but as a rule they do not have a desire to work in the government sector.
That’s why we are here. Jack Smith and all the other attorneys who have been playing ‘get Trump’; are not really that smart. They always have a plan and then something happens to mess up that plan and then….
The Supreme Court has to step up and do what is right and constitutional. They have a reputation and are in charge of the judiciary, therefore at some point, practically speaking, they have to say enough is enough and now we are going to adhere to the US Constitution.
.
Supporting State AGs
STEVE MARSHALL Attorney General State of Alabama MAIN Author
TREG TAYLOR Attorney General State of Alaska
ASHLEY MOODY Attorney General State of Florida
RAÚL R. LABRADOR Attorney General State of Idaho
THEODORE E. ROKITA Attorney General State of Indiana
BRENNA BIRD Attorney General State of Iowa
DANIEL CAMERON Attorney General Commonwealth of Kentucky
JEFF LANDRY Attorney General State of Louisiana
LYNN FITCH Attorney General State of Mississippi
ANDREW BAILEY Attorney General State of Missouri
AUSTIN KNUDSEN Attorney General State of Montana
MICHAEL T. HILGERS Attorney General State of Nebraska
DREW WRIGLEY Attorney General State of North Dakota
ALAN WILSON Attorney General State of South Carolina
MARTY J. JACKLEY Attorney General State of South Dakota
KEN PAXTON Attorney General State of Texas
SEAN D. REYES Attorney General State of Utah
PATRICK MORRISEY Attorney General State of West Virginia
BRIDGET HILL Attorney General State of Wyoming
https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/images/press/USA%20v.%20Trump%20Amicus%20Filed.pdf
WTH is Virginias AG? Arkansas?
The filing by Ed Meese is very compelling – Basically Smith has no standing, and has been impersonating a ‘special prosecutor’ Wow! Really not surprised given all the illegality from this DOJ and Garland.
I pray this works. We could use a few wins on our side.
I agree with former AG Meese re: Jack Smith’s authority…but then again when did rules and law actually pertain to liberals??
I would much rather have President Vladimir Putin be at the helm in America, Canada and many other countries. He would put a stop to this clown show shit country America has become, hated all around the world. Perhaps rightfully so. God Bless P. Putin and P. Trump!!