• @shalafi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    12
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Bingo. It’s like the Colorado judge who found Trump factually guilty of insurrection. That case was getting appealed, no matter what. But now the next court(s) in line has to take that fact into account, they don’t get to rehash or question it.

    tl;dr: All these things we’re mad about are brilliant legal maneuverings.

    • @zzzz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      121 year ago

      Yeah right. Like how Mueller was taking his time because he was building an air-tight case. I’ve been hearing this kind of thing since early in his presidency. I no longer buy that the “good guys” have a plan and will put a bow on it in the end.

    • @MotoAsh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      101 year ago

      A “brilliant” legal maneuver would be having a legal system where a fucking literal traitor doesn’t need to be treated with kid gloves… This entire thing is a fucking farce and no amount of “genius” political posturing will ever correct it.

    • @Boddhisatva@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      21 year ago

      That turns out not to be the case. Both sides are appealing that ruling.

      CREW is disputing Wallace’s final determination that Trump qualifies for Colorado’s primary ballot, while Trump’s team identified 11 issues for review from the final order, including but not limited to the finding that he engaged in an insurrection.

      So they are trying to overturn that factual finding. Trump will try to drag this out forever or until he can try and pardon himself.