David Rothkopf: Supreme Court decision to hear immunity case "is outrageous and, at its heart, fundamentally corrupt"

[highplainsdem]

Link to tweet

David Rothkopf
@djrothkopf

Let's not beat around the bush, decision by the Supreme Court to hear the Trump immunity case is outrageous and, at its heart, fundamentally corrupt. The Appeals Court decision was bullet proof and there is no case Trump has any sort of immunity. The decision not to hear it until late April makes further significant trial delays likely. They are deliberately delaying the trial without any reasonable legal reason to do so. This is a political decision and, in my estimation, an ugly one.

[Sneederbunk]

1. Hurry up and find presidential immunity so Biden can throw TSF into Gitmo.

[PortTack]

42. ☝️☝️☝️☝️

Corrupt SC…yes. But, they know they can’t grant him immunity for this very reason

[MOMFUDSKI]

46. But they can buy enough time to make any

of it just not matter. There is LAW and there is TIME.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

2. Perhaps we can outbid Harlan Crow and get an early decision.

[lastlib]

3. I'll start the GoFundMe for it.........

Everybody, check your sofa cushions for loose change to toss in, 'cause this is gonna take every dime we can squeeze out.

[SergeStorms]

4. Not a chance.

Crow has "history" with some members of the Supreme Whores, and we'd never be able to outbid that "history".

I imagine Thomas and Alito are at the bottom of this. Roberts and "his" court are once again led down the political path, straight to the bottom where Thomas and Alito dwell.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

9. Thomas, Alito, and Ginni.

[SergeStorms]

12. Clarence's "best friend"....

with whom he never discusses cases in front of him.
Yeah, right, Clarence. 🤨

[rubbersole]

24. Leonard Leo is carrying his nuts in a wheelbarrow tonight.

[Think. Again.]

5. All of us that aren't involved in prosecuting trump need to focus on ONE thing...

...building the massive Blue Wave that we will need in November.

No more bickering among ourselves on trivial differences of opinion, no more bashing any protesters who will hopefully vote blue, and no more insulting the youth vote, or the Pro-Palestinian vote, or the Pro-Israeli vote, or the Pro-clean energy vote, or ANY other faction of the left-voting population as a whole.

We need to ignore the right-wing attempts to cause division among us, and we need to offer possible 3rd party voters carrots, not sticks.

[calimary]

7. THIS, DAMMIT!!!

[Think. Again.]

10. You seem to be trying to cause division, we need a united Blue stand.

[Hekate]

14. If you mean this a sarcasm, please use the :sarcasm: smilie. This is, as you know, untrue & outrageous

[Demsrule86]

22. I have seen his other posts...I don't doubt he meant is sarcastically and likely went offline.

[Hekate]

34. It's settled -- thanks

[Hekate]

15. Arazi, the only reason I'm not alerting is that I think you mean this as sarcasm & haven't seen you spew this before

Please elaborate.

[Wednesdays]

61. And downvote and alert "DU Downers."

Those posting such tripe as "we're doomed," "there's no use voting anymore," "I'm ready to pack my bags for overseas," etc.

[Joinfortmill]

6. I'm hoping..

SCOTUS decided to take the case to put the finality on the case that Presidents do not have immunity. We shall know soon. Whatever happens, voting is imperative. Keep the faith.
The Universe could smile on us and The Traitor could stroke out before the decision.

[liberalla]

11. I'm hoping...

I'm really hoping you're right...

[FBaggins]

44. Rejecting the appeal would put finality on the case

Not that presidents lack immunity (they don’t) but that Trump’s actions do not fall within that immunity.

[moondust]

13. Melissa Murray's plausible theory

Last edited Wed Feb 28, 2024, 10:31 PM - Edit history (1)

earlier was that Clarence and Sammy are both in their 70s and could retire if TSF wins the election so he can appoint two new (radical RW) judges. Similar to the Turtle denying Garland's appointment that allowed TSF to then appoint three judges.

GQP corruption gone wild.

[highplainsdem]

26. All too reminiscent of Sandra Day O'Connor and the 2000 election. December 2000 article:

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/gore-call-irked-retirement-minded-justice/

Gore Call Irked Retirement-Minded Justice
By CBSNews.com staff CBSNews.com staff

December 18, 2000 / 9:37 AM EST / CBS


Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor was upset during an election-night party when she heard Florida was first called for Al Gore, exclaiming, "this is terrible," according to a report in Newsweek.

O'Connor made the comment at about 8 p.m., the magazine said, and then declared that meant the election was "over" because Gore had also won two other key states.

Quoting two eyewitnesses, Newsweek said O'Connor then walked off to get a plate of food, and her husband, John, explained to friends and acquaintances that she was upset because they wanted to retire to Arizona and a Gore presidency meant they would have to wait another four years.

Not long after Florida was called for Gore, news organizations retracted the call and said Florida was too close to call. The state was then called for Bush, but again that call was retracted and the race remained in limbo for five weeks.

-snip-

[Charging Triceratops]

55. 12/12/2000

The day democracy died.

[peppertree]

62. +1

"Sometimes I feel this bad about what we did." "That much, huh?"

[dalton99a]

16. The Supreme Whorehouse of the United States doesn't disappoint.

[dflprincess]

17. John Oliver needs to up his offer. nt

[NoMoreRepugs]

18. We can thank McTurtle for getting us one step closer to ending our Democracy.

[PTL_Mancuso]

35. Has any one person done more to harm the U.S. than Moscow Mitch?

Maybe. Maybe not. But we all must admit that he is at, or near, the top of the list of Democracy's destroyers.

[Demsrule86]

19. The truth is we must save ourselves by voting against Trump. If he wins, we lose our Democracy.

No court can save us. And I hope Biden and the government are prepared to do what it takes to stop the inevitable Trump insurrection...we may need to arrest those in the government or even call out the military. It is better to die on our feet than live on our knees. I still had some faith in SCOTUS. I don't anymore. We must stop them at the ballot box in November.

[Mr. Evil]

20. Another line of thinking...

could be that they'll wait until after the election and rule in TFG's favor should he be appointed (again) by the Electoral College or after President Biden wins they'll vote against immunity so Joe won't have immunity. Then they'll just let TFG fade away to prison having dodged several legal bullets for themselves.

Our Supreme Court is bought and paid for and beyond corrupt (minus the 3 mostly rational ones).

[thesquanderer]

37. Court will decide before the election, the case won't straddle two court terms, they don't do that.

That said, it is very possible that they will not decide early enough for there to also be a trial before the election (assuming court agrees with lower court that there is no immunity).

[Mr. Evil]

38. Thanx for the info.

[johnnyfins]

21. I have read all of the replies.

Why do I still have the NAZI court in the movie Valkyerie as a visual in my mind?

We as a nation are DONE. Fascism is coming like an Auschwitz train on the tracks. Take care of the people you love.

[Earth-shine]

31. Don't give up. Democracy is not something that can be earned. Apparently, it must be continually fought for.

The jackals will always be at the door wanting to take it away.

[onenote]

23. Rothkopf -- another "expert" with no experience practicing law, let alone before the Supreme Court

But he knows better than Jack Smith, who essentially proposed the course of action that the Court has taken by asking the Court to grant cert. Smith wanted a more expedited schedule -- by about a month -- but otherwise, the Court took him up on his proposed course of action. With no dissents.

[TexasDem69]

27. Whoa, a rational post!

All good points.

[FBaggins]

45. Your last point is the key IMO

There are three justices who could (and at least one who likely would) publicly dissent if the decision the hear the case were corrupt/outrageous or intentionally scheduled to help TFG

[3Hotdogs]

51. Yes. But the court could have issued a "refusal to hear" and let the lower court decision stand.

Actions on the case would have resumed.. Now, things are further delayed.

[onenote]

52. That is the one thing that Smith didn't ask them to do.

Last edited Thu Feb 29, 2024, 06:58 PM - Edit history (1)

[bluestarone]

60. So, a court can't think?

Please STOP bashing Smith. For some reason your doing a lot of that?

[onenote]

64. In fact I have expressly and repeatedly said o don't blame Smith

He took the best option that was available to him given that it was all but inevitable that the court would take this case. Before putting words in my mouth try reading my posts.

[bluestarone]

65. Well, i've noticed you have done quite a bit of bad mouthing Smith lately

Just thought i'd mention it.

[onenote]

66. No. I've done a lot of pointing out what Smith told the court

I don’t blame him or fault him for that. I do fault those who claim that what the court decided was inexplicable. There was never a chance the court would deny cert which is why Smith correctly called for the court to treat the application as a petition for certiorari with an expedited schedule instead of asking the court to treat the application as a petition for certiorari and deny it.

[bluestarone]

67. You see, here's the problem.

You DO NOT mention anything like that in your posts. You comment and it sounds like Smith is stupid. That's the way i see your posts being.

[Shoonra]

25. Try to look on the bright side .....

The April date for the Supreme Court hearing on Trump's claim of immunity, together with the usual delay in getting a decision out, means that Trump will be kept on tenterhooks for much of the duration of the election campaign. And, since the Appeals Court's denial of immunity is considered flawless, Trump's attempt to claim immunity serves as a "plea of confession and avoidance"; in other words, he has confessed to crimes and was depending on the immunity argument of avoid punishment - but with immunity rejected even by the Supreme Court, he has virtually no defense left. Even if he is elected President, he can only pardon the federal charges but not the state verdicts.

[dlk]

28. Certain justices on the court have egos that require they have the final word

This was a given.

[flashman13]

30. That very simple and clear headline says it all.

Putin owns Trump and Trump owns SCOTUS. We be fuct!

[MOMFUDSKI]

32. Our side must now out-corrupt them.

Smith leaks everything to the world. We need a patriot.

[SouthernDem4ever]

50. Also Biden can declare the same power for him.

Imagine what he could do with that.

[Buttertheslid.]

33. Mitch McConnell walks away having destroyed the justice system.

We have the most corrupt supreme court to have ever served the oligarchy of America thanks to McConnell,he has done more damage to America than any politician in history and now his monster has been freed to roam the earth Trump is damaged and dangerous Thanks Mitch the Devil has the car running in the driveway waiting for you.

[PTL_Mancuso]

36. Thumbing his nose and flipping the bird at Democracy, Mitch dissolves into the sunset... or is that HELL?

[czarjak]

39. Go low?

If you absolutely insist.

[otchmoson]

48. Would this be an acceptable low?

The tradition of the Department of Justice avoiding any “naming of names” within 60 days of an election (or is it 90?) is based on a “legal opinion” issued by the department, itself. If Trump’s plan was to delay everything until that window . . . and apparently has succeeded . . . why can’t the Justice Department issue a new OLC letter stating that the Justice Department is separate from politics, and the previous letter circumscribing their actions is “null and void”. If the “non-political” Supreme Court can put their finger on the scale, then so can the Justice Department. Then proceed with the prosecution of Trump up to and including inauguration day. In the meantime, perhaps they could revoke Trump’s bail to offset the “pocket veto” issued by the Supreme Court. If he were behind bars or ankle-monitored, with travel and communication platforms suspended, the temperature throughout the country might cool a bit.

[Skittles]

40. they are the very definiton of an ACTIVIST COURT

ACTIVELY PIMPING FOR REPUKES

[PortTack]

43. Don't overlook the fact that the crazy maga judges love them some power! Tfg in a second term will do

Everything he can to dissolve the court. There’s only room for one at the top in a dictatorship

[SouthernDem4ever]

49. They don't seem to care as long as the gravy train continues

But I hope they realize that will be on the chopping block too. As soon as they aren't needed any longer Clarence's so-called "friends" will no longer be offering.

[generalbetrayus]

63. That's what I've never been able to understand about this Supreme Court.

Don't these Federalist Society clowns realize they are toast along with the rest of the Supremes once Orange Julius Caesar becomes our first dictator?

[Buckeyeblue]

47. So four justices think the lower court decision is wrong or needs clarifying?

I'm trying to understand why the court, or at least four members of the court, feel the need to hear this case. It makes me wonder if some of the justices think a president does have immunity from prosecution for actions they take as President.

It's going to be an interesting oral argument.

[onenote]

53. At least four

Could be all nine for all we know. Wouldn’t surprise me if it was all nine.

[Hugin]

54. The biggest wrong here would be if three of the Justices who voted...

To hear the case are those who were appointed by TSF. They should have recused themselves from any involvement in the matter.

[msfiddlestix]

56. Well, what a surprise. Not. And not an effing thing we can do to respond except to vote.

Which I have done, and my ballot has been received and processed. I know this because I'm signed on to Ballottrax and they keep voters informed of the ballot status of individual mail in ballots. Our primary is Tuesday. I expect Biden and Schiff to win their primaries.
But I fear SCOTUS intends to scuttle our victory come the General Elections in November. I expect they will interfere in every conceivable way they can, because if we win, their standing as supreme justices could be in jeopardy.

And that is what this is all about, IMO. I feel quite anxious about the prospect of another run of the on going SCOTUS election intemperance they've acted on for the past 25 years in various ways.

I hope our turnout is so overwhelming as to make it impossible to negate. It's the only thing, the only way we can turn this ship away from crashing into the monstrous iceberg ahead.

[Martin68]

57. Yup. "Fundamentally corrupt."

[Nixie]

58. It is corrupt. It is the opposite reliance on deadlines in Bush v Gore.

As I remember, the SC said in Bush v Gore that it was ok to continue counting ballots, but they set an immediate arbitrary deadline that made it impossible.

In this case, they are ignoring the election deadline as an obvious delay tactic.

Neither case sounds very "progressive."

[louis-t]

59. They are trying to figure out how to give him immunity

then sunset it so it doesn't apply to Biden. Mark my words.

[dlk]

68. This decision was as much about protecting Ginny Thomas as anything else

Priorities...