Just an observation about the SCOTUS hearings yesterday

[kairos12]

One of the things I heard was it was burdensome for Trump to have to respond to this "avalanche" of subpoenas.

Excuse me. Has anyone looked at his official schedule in recent months. It's nothing but executive time (TV watching), twitter outrages, and carnival barker press conferences. And earlier it was rallies and golf.

So in response to that argument. Ah, no. Hell no.

[Ohiogal]

1. Excellent point.

[leftieNanner]

2. That's what Rachel focused on last night

How much "work" can you do if you send out 125 tweets in one day! Plus those tweets are often re-tweets which means you had to have read the original post. Plus all of his comments about Fox and Friends and Hannity shows proves that he's watching TV all morning.

Yeah. Can't say that responding to a subpoena or two (which would be handled by your attorneys) would cut into that tough work day of his.

[PJMcK]

3. It's a bullshit argument

Trump has lawyers. That's who has to spend time on the subpoenas. Trump can't even read them.

Besides, this issue was tried and judged by SCOTUS.

Nice try, Donnie.

[C_U_L8R]

4. Yes that and...

the President is not above the law. Subpoenas and indictment are burdonsome for everyone. Don't like it, don't break the law.

[Baked Potato]

5. They are arguing as if Trump were a "real" President.

Basically, their arguments were attempts at getting the court to think about the impact on a future, “good” President. It’s all they have.

[kozar]

6. wouldn't the probem be?

Having an "avalanche" of subpoenas? I'm saying, corporations,businesses, all get subpoenas. But when your argument to a court, much less the highest court, uses the word avalanche? Maybe the court needs to ask, why an avalanche?


Koz

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

8. Why would anybody get an avalanche of subpoenas unless

they were suspected of being up to no good?

[lagomorph777]

12. Unless they were committing a mudslide of dirty deeds?

[kozar]

13. zactly

was my point to OP.. don't over think,, look at simplest answers. We all have the simple answers. Fight for that, online,vote, volunteer. My point is, we have simple answers that need addressed. Drump is using us,even to the Supreme Court,,slow down folks. Believe what you see. And never,,and as an old guy,, NEVER get caught up in rhetoric,, it is what the Orange Turd does best.

Just believe in what you believe in,,and believe in it enough to fight for it,,whatever the effort.


Koz

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

7. That's why he has an army of lawyers

with whom it's obvious that he rarely communicates. The lawyers handle the subpoenas so His Lardship can golf, watch TV and tweet.

[thucythucy]

9. Funny how the avalanche of subpoenas issued during the Clinton administration

by the insanely partisan Starr investigation (staffed by a current Supreme Court justice) wasn't a problem for Republicans.

I guess President Clinton was just that much better at managing his time.

[Quixote1818]

10. Trump is burdensome. nt

[CaptainTruth]

11. Ironically, the fact that he's fought these subpoenas proves he DOES have the time.

The subpoenas in question went to 3rd parties, not Trump. He didn't have to do a single thing, nothing.

So, his argument is that doing literally "nothing" is too great a burden, but fighting 2 court cases all the way to SCOTUS is not.

It seems to me like he destroyed his own "great burden" argument the day he hired lawyers to fight the subpoenas. I hope the justices realize that.