Re: Dems Considering January-6ing Trump if He Wins Re-Election

On 3/2/24 7:52 PM, suzeeq wrote:

On 3/2/2024 3:40 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:

Sat, 2 Mar 2024 21:40:39 -0000 (UTC), Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com>:

>

. . .

>

If the appeals end, then there's no further delay to the trials. This
isn't a waste of time but moves things ahead.

>

Except that if I'm remembering which case the judge said that there
would be a 90 day period for the lawyers to prepare their case that
now doesn't start until after the Supreme Court makes their decision.
Which means if the court was to wait until near the end of the current
term (June/July time period) the actual trial may not begin until
after the election. Which is what Trump is pushing for in all of his
cases.

>
shawn, please stop saying this. If the Supreme Court wanted that kind of
delay, they'd simply have scheduled arguments for the following term.
That they scheduled arguments soon is a huge hint that their opinion
isn't going to be delayed till end of term. I don't think the trial will
be held beyond the election but beyond the convention.
>
They can read the election calendar.
>

They could have taken it up 2 months ago, when it was first filed. But they didn't.

Because this isn't about SCOTUS ruling.  It's all about delaying the cases until after the election.
SCOTUS is NEVER ruling that a president is a King. If Trump wins, they're obvious ruling doesn't matter.  All the cases go away.
--
"Thou shalt not make a machine in the likeness of a man’s mind." - OC Bible  25B.G.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ek8kap93bmk0q5w/D%20U%20N%20E%20Part%20II.jpg?dl=0
Gracie, age 6.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/0es3xolxka455iw/BetterThingsToDo.jpg?dl=0