From: Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com>
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,can.politics,alt.politics.trump,alt.politics.liberalism,alt.politics.democrats,alt.politics.usa.republican
Subject: =?UTF-8?Q?Re=3A_New_York_=22trials=22_and_election_interference_?=
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2024 11:26:23 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
On 2024-04-16 10:25, Max Boot wrote:
> On 4/16/2024 9:08 AM, Alan wrote:
>> On 2024-04-16 08:05, Max Boot wrote:
>>> On 4/16/2024 5:23 AM, NoBody wrote:
>>>> Why is it necessary to have the trials just this moment during the
>>>> election cycle? No one has come up with a reasonable explanation.
>>>
>>> The reason is Trump. If he hadn't kept seeking unreasonable delays in
>>> all of his trials, they would already be over. Trump is the one who
>>> pushed them deep into the election cycle.
>>>
>>> There is no election interference aspect to the trials â none
>>> whatsoever.
>>>
>>
>> And since he has proclaimed he would definitely be found innocent, he
>> should have wanted them speedily concluded.
>
> Agreed, up to a point. At least, that's partially the case if Trump is
> telling the truth about his confidence that he would be found innocent.
> However, this gets to his entire immunity claim. If Trump really has
> immunity from prosecution on some charge, then he would have a right not
> to be tried at all, regardless of whether or not he is confident of an
> acquittal. I think most legal scholars believe his claims of immunity
> are bullshit. Trump and his asshole lawyers are advancing the clearly
> wrong theory that *anything* Trump did *while* president becomes a
> "presidential act." So if he became enraged and kicked his toady Waltine
> Nauta in the crotch, he would have immunity from prosecution after
> leaving office because that was a "presidential act." That cannot
> possibly be true. It's as absurd as the Seal Team 6 hypothetical. It is
> *not* the case that anything a president does while in office is a
> "presidential act."
>
> I think Trump has *little* confidence of an acquittal, and that's why he
> keeps trying to delay trial. It has worked very well for him in the past.
>
Oh, I completely agree.
:-)