President Biden: The NEW one and only politics thread

Then they'll issue their ruling in 2025 at gunpoint.

 

America First!

 

Talk about a golden opportunity for somebody to put one of those 400 million to good use. It's long long past time one of these international despot dipshits ate a hot breakfast.

 

Step on up then, Mark David.

 

What will Trump and his supporters do if he loses (again)?
What g*ddamn incentive does Biden have to play it by the book if HE loses?

 

The chilling thing is Trump got clobbered in 2020. And STILL not only claims he won, but "by a lot."!!!!!!! And millions think this Biden rout was stolen.

Biden may need a Hail Mary (or a Hail Jack Smith) to eke out a narrow win in 2024. And it would almost certainly come with the usual "metro areas late with their final results which overwhelmingly will go to Biden" caveat, which will look suspicious as hell to those millions again.

The only saving grace is that Trump doesn't have the advantage of his ass already sitting in the Oval Office.

 

Game changer

 

You can tell exactly which outlets/reporters the Koch network has its hooks into. Look at the uptick in positive Haley coverage since she got their backing.

 

The really scary thing is that we essentially have the same Supreme Court that came within a whisker of handing Trump the election in Texas v. Pennsylvania.

 

Yeah, but luckily Clarence Thomas bucked his wife's advice and voted the right way. It seems we never learned our lesson from the Bowling Green Massacre.

 

I don't know that I'd agree with that characterization of Texas v. Pennsylvania. SCOTUS rejected it on standing and only two of the justices - Alito & Thomas - voted to allow it to be heard.

For the type of case Texas filed, declining to hear it on standing is about as big of a bench-slap as one could expect. The rough equivalent of granting a 12(b)(6) motion (failure to state a claim) on your more run-of-the-mill civil cases.

FWIW, I expect SCOTUS will move quickly on this and they can when they need to. If they're as craven as many people believe, a ruling in his favor on the immunity issue kills this trial and depending on how broadly its written kills the documents case too. If they do it quickly, then it allows the political process to play out without the encumbrance of these two trials, and for many conservative legal scholars allowing the political process to resolve a problem is greatly favored over the courts doing it.

Similarly, if they see his immunity claim being as ridiculous as I do, getting the immunity question out of the way so that at least one of these cases can conclude before the election is also preferable to the potential constitutional crises of an active criminal trial proceeding against a president-elect, or worse a sitting president.

If nothing else, Roberts cares deeply about the credibility of the court and knows that he's presiding in an era where it's at its lowest in at least a century, if not two. I believe he'll want to resolve this quickly for that reason, but he's gotta get at least four other justices to agree to that.

Sorta related: I don't even want to begin thinking about the constitutional crisis we're headed for if Trump gets re-elected while the Georgia case is still pending. Or the New York criminal case, for that matter, though I think that one is weak AF and Trump probably wins if it ever goes to trial.

 

Mine was in jest ... all the "The Shiite Supremes yada yada" brings out the mischievous side of me.