• pixxelkick@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    104
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Anyone noticed how Trumps legal plan has a lot of weird overlap with Sovereign Citizens?

    Dudes repeatedly having to be told “you can’t just declare immunity mate” so he goes on Truth Social and malds about how unfair it is.

    • neptune@dmv.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      9 months ago

      If you have lawyers you can pay, or pretend to pay, to make your stupid arguments, all of a sudden courts take you seriously.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        9 months ago

        That’s the baffling part to me. He doesn’t pay them. He doesn’t even pretend to pay them. And yet new lawyers keep popping up to argue his cases for him.

        • Atom@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          9 months ago

          His supporters pay them very well. They get bait and switched into donating to his PACs to instead of his campaign directly and those PACs pay the legal bills.

          "As Trump’s legal battles ramped up in the second half of last year, so did his legal spending – with his political action committees reporting a total of $34 million in legal expenditures in the second half of last year compared to roughly $26 million in the first half, according to the disclosures.

          Trump’s leadership PAC, Save America, continued to foot much of Trump’s legal bills in the second half of last year, spending nearly $26 million on legal fees and other related expenses, while only raising $6 million."

          https://abcnews.go.com/US/trump-spent-50m-pac-super-pac-money-legal/story?id=106843612

  • BeanGoblin@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    95
    ·
    9 months ago

    “Please hold off punishing me from unsuccessfully cheating in the last election until I am able to successfully cheat in this one”

      • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        9 months ago

        I’m not so sure on this one. Supremes, even Trump appointees, like power and influence. Trump has already come out and said he isn’t going to be bound by law which means they effectively will have no power anymore. The salary of a Supreme Court justice isn’t enough to live on lavishly. Just as Justice Thomas who lives large by being buddy-buddy with industry leaders who stand to benefit from his rulings. No power in the future, no benefits in the future.

        • DarkNightoftheSoul@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          20
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          I’ll believe that when I see it. Been told “No, they’re definitely going to hold him accountable. He’s in REAL trouble now, not like the last several decades of fake trouble he’s been in” too many times now. I hope my pessimistic skepticism is misplaced, but I’m not holding my breath.

          • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            9 months ago

            I’m not holding my breath.

            I’m not either, but those with the decision to make lose if they give into Trump on this one. Thats a key difference to his prior decisions that went in his favor.

        • theneverfox@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          But it’s not a matter of Trump… He won’t survive another term. He might not make it to election, win or lose - he’s old as fuck.

          It’s about the freedom society, or whatever they call themselves - where will their backers land?

          Because where their power meets the groups money is where luxury happens…

  • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    50
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    This was always the plan.

    Stall as long as possible and then as a last ditch effort claim its too close to the election.ß

  • nilloc@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    9 months ago

    Could we get 100,000 (or however many it takes) eligible Lemmy users together, and all sign each others’ petitions to run for president, then all start committing crimes and be immune since we’re running for god emperor president.

  • Pratai@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Innocent people don’t need immunity. He admitted guilt. All we have to do is lock him up now.

  • RGB3x3@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    I really enjoyed 2021 through mid-2023 when I stopped having to hear about this asshole all the time.

    He literally consumes all news coverage whenever he opens his mouth or anything happens with him.

  • Dkarma@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    9 months ago

    There is no “right” to be able to run for president. Why do courts keep pretending that matters?

    • frezik@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      9 months ago

      There’s a scenario there where Trump becomes President and then a state declares him guilty. What happens when they try to make him serve his sentence?

      This is not a question we should ever need to answer, but we’re staring at the possibility.

    • sharkaccident@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      9 months ago

      No way Rico case happens before election, the DA couldn’t keep her pants on. It will be years before Rico trail starts and by then all Trump needs is governor or DA lacky to drop everything. The Jan 6 case is the only one that could happen before election.

  • Treczoks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    9 months ago

    If he can do crimes and be immune, Biden can, too. Take a gun to the debate and take care of Donald.

  • Optional@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    9 months ago

    This is some kind of psyop to see who snaps first and straight-up murders that motherfucker.

    (Spoiler: it turns out to be Mike Lindell on a five day bender.)

    • El Barto@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      You’re now on a list. I know you’re not serious, but be careful when saying this kind of stuff online. You don’t know who may be reading, thinking you’re threatening a former U.S. president, and taking you seriously.

      • Optional@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        9 months ago

        Sure, the first rule is always take Internet comments seriously. That’s super efficient.

        Meanwhile, the people who actually call judges offices, and write emails and texts using their full, real name to deliberately, literally threaten them with murder - yeah, nothing.

        Hell, the guy who broadcast for them to do that got fined, what, 50 cents?

        So i think we can relax a little about random stupid Internet comments. And take this traitor, more seriously.

        • El Barto@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          What’s your source on people threatening judges with their real names?

          And you don’t think the secret service take all these things seriously?

      • Optional@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Sure, the first rule is always take Internet comments seriously. That’s super efficient.

        Meanwhile, the people who actually call judges offices, and write emails and texts using their full, real name to deliberately, literally threaten them with murder - yeah, nothing.

        Hell, the guy who broadcast for them to do that got fined, what, 50 cents?

        So i think we can relax a little about random stupid Internet comments. And take this traitor, more seriously.

  • Rapidcreek@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    So, last week the Federal Appeals Court ruled against Trumps immunity motion and gave him until today to go to the Supremes. The question really is if SCOTUS will take the case.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    9 months ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    It met a deadline to ask the justices to intervene that the federal appeals court in Washington set when it rejected Trump’s immunity claims and ruled the trial could proceed.

    WASHINGTON (AP) — Former President Donald Trump faces a Monday deadline for asking the Supreme Court to extend the delay in his trial on charges he plotted to overturn his 2020 election loss.

    The federal appeals court in Washington set the deadline for filing when it rejected Trump’s immunity claims last week and ruled the trial could proceed.

    If Trump were to defeat President Joe Biden, he could potentially try to use his position as head of the executive branch to order a new attorney general to dismiss the federal cases he faces or even seek a pardon for himself.

    The Supreme Court has previously held that presidents are immune from civil liability for official acts, and Trump’s lawyers have for months argued that that protection should be extended to criminal prosecution as well.

    The case was argued before Judges Florence Pan and J. Michelle Childs, appointees of Biden, a Democrat, and Karen LeCraft Henderson, who was named to the bench by President George H.W.


    The original article contains 973 words, the summary contains 195 words. Saved 80%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!