HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Why did John Roberts agre...

Fri Jul 10, 2020, 03:17 PM

Why did John Roberts agree to take this New York case in the first place?

Just to delay it? By what's been already six months and likely to last past the election.

Seriously, 9-0 tells me there was no constitutional debate at all. I smell a Republican rat.

13 replies, 1127 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread

Response to Goodheart (Original post)

Fri Jul 10, 2020, 03:20 PM

1. But but...isn't he a new Democratic hero??? I haven't trusted a Republican since my 1st vote in 1970

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BamaRefugee (Reply #1)

Fri Jul 10, 2020, 03:22 PM

3. Looks to me like he should have just allowed the lower court and Grand Jury to proceed,

issue an indictment, and then the USSC question could have been the important one: whether or not sitting presidents can be indicted.

This was BULLSHIT.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BamaRefugee (Reply #1)

Fri Jul 10, 2020, 03:23 PM

4. It ended the bullshit Trump has complete immunity...and is thus above the law. It was

a good decision.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Goodheart (Original post)

Fri Jul 10, 2020, 03:21 PM

2. It done...

Move forward...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Goodheart (Original post)

Fri Jul 10, 2020, 03:23 PM

5. Not necessarily

If the Court didn't resolve this issue, it would have remained up in the air. Trump would have continued making this bogus argument - and it could have found its way into other circuits and cases, creating a mess, as well.

I think the Court was probably right to step in and resolve it, once and for all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Reply #5)

Fri Jul 10, 2020, 03:26 PM

6. The lower court may well give suggestions to trump on how to change some things and actually win the

case.
Not sure it's "done".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BamaRefugee (Reply #6)

Fri Jul 10, 2020, 03:26 PM

7. I don't understand your post

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Reply #7)

Fri Jul 10, 2020, 04:48 PM

12. Here's exactly what I'm talking about. "Trump gets a chance TO TRY NEW ARGUMENTS" 1st paragraph

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-07-10/july-16-hearing-set-in-ny-trump-tax-case-after-high-court-rules

in my work, I have to testify in court often, I see judges who seem to want a case to go in a certain directions sometimes say to a lawyer "now if you were, let's say, citing Jones v. Smith, then I would see that as valid"...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BamaRefugee (Reply #12)

Fri Jul 10, 2020, 04:53 PM

13. He could do that anyway

And at least the Court shut down one argument.

No matter what the Court did, someone would complain about it. I think they handled this as well as they could.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BamaRefugee (Reply #6)

Fri Jul 10, 2020, 03:33 PM

8. New York State prosecutor Vance is looking for how payments to Stormy Daniels...

... got reported (or IF they were) and if so, were they declared as "Legal fees" and deducted to (partially) avoid paying taxes, which would concord with Cohen's answers in his interrogation.

It is very specific. No need to go through thousands of pages of shenanigans. That can come later...

That could go fast (or not). Find the 1st crime (committed while in Office), and issue an indictment (of Individual 1).

LOCK HIM UP!

MAKE JUSTICE GREAT AGAIN

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Goodheart (Original post)

Fri Jul 10, 2020, 03:41 PM

9. Roberts alone can't decide to take a case on his own.

It takes 4 votes to grant cert. Admittedly, there are more than 4 conservatives on the court, but Roberts didnít agree to take the case even if he voted to grant cert. There were at least 3 other votes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Goodheart (Original post)

Fri Jul 10, 2020, 03:55 PM

10. He wanted to take it to assert conclusively to Trump that he is not above the law.

That is what the argument was with the SC, not what was actually being heard in the NY case.

Everyone needs to calm down, this is bad for Trump and allows the lower court hearings and the house hearings to continue. Otherwise they would have stopped.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Goodheart (Original post)

Fri Jul 10, 2020, 04:15 PM

11. Simple, impeachment

They wanted it delayed until impeachment proceedings were over, otherwise it would have come out before the trial.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread