The Supreme Court’s ruling is kind of odd, though, isn’t it? “We find that your argument has failed because it was made on these grounds. It’s likely that you would have gotten more traction if you’d argued X, Y, Z instead.”
Roberts famously claimed that his job as a jurist is to call “balls and strikes.” This feels more like the umpire has gone out to the mound to offer advice on the pitcher’s throwing motion.
I read it as just the reverse. The Court of Appeals considered the case from all angles, including the strongest case, as if Trump were still Prez, and correctly ruled against him. Therefore the more complicated case, but clearly weaker one, of a former Prez, should be considered obiter, ie the Supreme Court wasn’t accepting or rejecting that part of the decision.
The Nixon case was a sitting President advancing a privilege claim, which failed. That’s the strongest possible case. Even applying that case, as if Trump were the Prez, he didn’t succeed.
Just checked his old timey blog site (no comments allowed) and nothing from him. I know something is coming. Just a few days ago Tucker Carlson called Kavanaugh a cringing little liberal so I expect even better things out of Trump. Hope those three Justices are wearing masks to protect their faces from the
He has some unintentional pearls of wisdom: “What has become of our country when they choose to fight against its own people? Many Americans today feel that they have been denied their Constitutional rights and freedoms and are isolated and forgotten, in essence, placed in a solitary confinement.”
Heh. I knew that off-the-cuff phrasing was not going to pass muster!
But seriously, many reports have it that some days he screams and yells continuously, while on other days, he screams and yells a bit less. Wednesday night was plainly a “continuously” one.
Yeah. Why someone hasn’t come up with some sort of apparatus that would turn Trump’s fuming into electricity, is a wonder. He could power half of Florida.
I’m waiting for him to ask how a rapist like Kavanaugh got on the Supreme Court in the first place. Obviously it was the behind the scenes dealings of Mitch McConnell that got it done.
A group in North Carolina is challenging the re-election candidacy of North Carolina Representative Madison Cawthorn on the basis of section three of the Fourteenth Amendment (see below for text). He’s dismissing the challenge (see Fox News) but according to an New York Times op-ed by a former U.S. attorney, there is a strong case. And there are some other Republican House members who might be challenged on similar ground.
Summary
“No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.”