BillsFanNC

Everyone sees how this case and all the attacks on conservative SC justices Thomas. Alito and Coney-Barrett tie in, right? So when the orange dude is found guilty every single person who so much as raises an eyebrow at the blatant lawfare will be henceforth be a...you guessed it... A justice denier! Then when/if the appeal goes to the SC, the SC justices who reverse it will be...yup...justice deniers too! When you recognize the marxist playbook you can see the plays coming from a mile away.

🎯

🎯

The King definitely pleasures itself to Andrew Weissman and Marc Elias clips. Oh and Jim "No Reasonable Prosecutor" Comey while chanting rule of law.....rule OF LAW....RULE OF LAW!!!!!!

I don't believe that Mrs. Alito dislikes America, but you have every right to believe that narrative if you wish. But her husband's recusal from any case he might hear based solely on Mrs. Alito's beliefs or actions is indeed ludicrous. Many examples upthread from the other side of the aisle where spousal political actions did not result in judges recusal. Or if we want to leave the spouses out of it and look at actions of SC justices on their own that didn't result in recusal. https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/national-international/fitting-for-dissent-rbgs-iconic-collars-were-more-than-an-accessory/2423201/ After this overt political action by Ginsberg donning her famous dissent collar the day after his election in 2016, should she have recused from all cases Trump related? was frequently worn to show disagreement with the majority opinion on cases before the court. But she also donned it on other occasions, most notably the day after Donald Trump's election in 2016. Ginsburg raised eyebrows when she took the bench wearing her dissent collar even though the court didn't issue any decisions that day, according to NBC News.

Not Finding and The King... They went to Green Sky School of Law.

FU commies

F U commies.

The iron law is absolute.

⬆️ Commie supports commie judges ? No friggin way !

Hey Finding. Anyone not a commie has you pegged for the absolute clown that you are. Keep digging though

⬆️ Finding Saul the commie.

MY LEGAL ADVICE TO PRESIDENT TRUMP'S ATTORNEYS: NEXT STEP U.S. SUPREME COURT In Bush v. Gore, the United States Supreme Court interceded in the Florida Supreme Court's deliberations because that Court was changing the Florida voting system on the fly, thereby violating the EQUAL PROTECTION rights of the Florida voters; that is, the state court was establishing new standards for resolving a presidential election. The Manhattan trial court has done worse. It has taken up a case in which there is exclusive FEDERAL JURISDICTION (involving the Federal Election Campaign Act) despite the fact that the federal agencies with authority over enforcing federal campaign laws, the Federal Election Commission and the Southern District of New York/U.S. attorney's office, declined to bring charges; where the judge is conflicted (his daughter is raising tens of millions of dollars on behalf of her Democrat Party clients); where collateral evidence has been abundant (and has no probative value); where the elements of the supposed federal offense were never articulated by the state or the Court; the imposition of a gag order on the defendant who is the future Republican nominee for president in the midst of the federal campaign for president; and so forth. Moreover, this state court could have easily avoided influencing and interfering with the federal presidential election merely by setting a later time for the case, if the court actually believed it somehow had merit. After all, the state waited years to bring its case. Therefore, there is not only a federal constitutional equal protection violation, in that this state trial court has purposefully interposed itself into the federal presidential election without authority or jurisdiction but has also violated the federal constitutionally protected due process rights of the future Republican nominee for president. Furthermore, the voters are to determine the federal election outcome without the interference of a state court attempting to influence the result. If President Trump is found guilty of any of the thirty-four charges, I would strongly encourage his attorneys to seek an emergency appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court based, at least in significant part, on Bush v. Gore. Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98, 103 (2000

🎯