General Discussion

highplainsdem

(48,993 posts) Wed Feb 28, 2024, 09:02 PM Feb 28

216

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

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.

68 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

David Rothkopf: Supreme Court decision to hear immunity case "is outrageous and, at its heart, fundamentally corrupt" [View all] highplainsdem Feb 28 OP

Hurry up and find presidential immunity so Biden can throw TSF into Gitmo. Sneederbunk Feb 28 #1

☝️☝️☝️☝️ PortTack Feb 29 #42

But they can buy enough time to make any MOMFUDSKI Feb 29 #46

Perhaps we can outbid Harlan Crow and get an early decision. Hermit-The-Prog Feb 28 #2

I'll start the GoFundMe for it......... lastlib Feb 28 #3

Not a chance. SergeStorms Feb 28 #4

Thomas, Alito, and Ginni. Hermit-The-Prog Feb 28 #9

Clarence's "best friend".... SergeStorms Feb 28 #12

Leonard Leo is carrying his nuts in a wheelbarrow tonight. rubbersole Feb 28 #24

All of us that aren't involved in prosecuting trump need to focus on ONE thing... Think. Again. Feb 28 #5

THIS, DAMMIT!!! calimary Feb 28 #7

Post removed Post removed Feb 28 #8

You seem to be trying to cause division, we need a united Blue stand. Think. Again. Feb 28 #10

This message was self-deleted by its author Pinback Feb 28 #29

If you mean this a sarcasm, please use the :sarcasm: smilie. This is, as you know, untrue & outrageous Hekate Feb 28 #14

I have seen his other posts...I don't doubt he meant is sarcastically and likely went offline. Demsrule86 Feb 28 #22

It's settled -- thanks Hekate Feb 28 #34

Arazi, the only reason I'm not alerting is that I think you mean this as sarcasm & haven't seen you spew this before Hekate Feb 28 #15

And downvote and alert "DU Downers." Wednesdays Feb 29 #61

I'm hoping.. Joinfortmill Feb 28 #6

I'm hoping... liberalla Feb 28 #11

Rejecting the appeal would put finality on the case FBaggins Feb 29 #44

Melissa Murray's plausible theory moondust Feb 28 #13

All too reminiscent of Sandra Day O'Connor and the 2000 election. December 2000 article: highplainsdem Feb 28 #26

12/12/2000 Charging Triceratops Feb 29 #55

+1 peppertree Feb 29 #62

The Supreme Whorehouse of the United States doesn't disappoint. dalton99a Feb 28 #16

John Oliver needs to up his offer. nt dflprincess Feb 28 #17

We can thank McTurtle for getting us one step closer to ending our Democracy. NoMoreRepugs Feb 28 #18

Has any one person done more to harm the U.S. than Moscow Mitch? PTL_Mancuso Feb 28 #35

The truth is we must save ourselves by voting against Trump. If he wins, we lose our Democracy. Demsrule86 Feb 28 #19

Another line of thinking... Mr. Evil Feb 28 #20

Court will decide before the election, the case won't straddle two court terms, they don't do that. thesquanderer Feb 28 #37

Thanx for the info. Mr. Evil Feb 28 #38

I have read all of the replies. johnnyfins Feb 28 #21

Don't give up. Democracy is not something that can be earned. Apparently, it must be continually fought for. Earth-shine Feb 28 #31

Rothkopf -- another "expert" with no experience practicing law, let alone before the Supreme Court onenote Feb 28 #23

Whoa, a rational post! TexasDem69 Feb 28 #27

Your last point is the key IMO FBaggins Feb 29 #45

Yes. But the court could have issued a "refusal to hear" and let the lower court decision stand. 3Hotdogs Feb 29 #51

That is the one thing that Smith didn't ask them to do. onenote Feb 29 #52

So, a court can't think? bluestarone Feb 29 #60

In fact I have expressly and repeatedly said o don't blame Smith onenote Feb 29 #64

Well, i've noticed you have done quite a bit of bad mouthing Smith lately bluestarone Feb 29 #65

No. I've done a lot of pointing out what Smith told the court onenote Feb 29 #66

You see, here's the problem. bluestarone Feb 29 #67

Try to look on the bright side ..... Shoonra Feb 28 #25

Certain justices on the court have egos that require they have the final word dlk Feb 28 #28

That very simple and clear headline says it all. flashman13 Feb 28 #30

Our side must now out-corrupt them. MOMFUDSKI Feb 28 #32

Also Biden can declare the same power for him. SouthernDem4ever Feb 29 #50

Mitch McConnell walks away having destroyed the justice system. Buttertheslid. Feb 28 #33

Thumbing his nose and flipping the bird at Democracy, Mitch dissolves into the sunset... or is that HELL? PTL_Mancuso Feb 28 #36

Go low? czarjak Feb 28 #39

Would this be an acceptable low? otchmoson Feb 29 #48

they are the very definiton of an ACTIVIST COURT Skittles Feb 29 #40

This message was self-deleted by its author GoodRaisin Feb 29 #41

Don't overlook the fact that the crazy maga judges love them some power! Tfg in a second term will do PortTack Feb 29 #43

They don't seem to care as long as the gravy train continues SouthernDem4ever Feb 29 #49

That's what I've never been able to understand about this Supreme Court. generalbetrayus Feb 29 #63

So four justices think the lower court decision is wrong or needs clarifying? Buckeyeblue Feb 29 #47

At least four onenote Feb 29 #53

The biggest wrong here would be if three of the Justices who voted... Hugin Feb 29 #54

Well, what a surprise. Not. And not an effing thing we can do to respond except to vote. msfiddlestix Feb 29 #56

Yup. "Fundamentally corrupt." Martin68 Feb 29 #57

It is corrupt. It is the opposite reliance on deadlines in Bush v Gore. Nixie Feb 29 #58

They are trying to figure out how to give him immunity louis-t Feb 29 #59

This decision was as much about protecting Ginny Thomas as anything else dlk Feb 29 #68