Then Chief Justice Burger, no liberal, wrote in the 5-4 Nixon v Fitzgerald case on which Trump’s lawyers relied in SCOTUS today that no claim of immunity for crimes committed by a former president while in office would “be credible.” He was right.

The justices who were eager to…

SCOTUS observation:

The men were emotional, irrational and hyperbolic.

The women had to rein them back in.

Hi, the Supreme Court isn’t an actual court. It’s six paid operatives pretending to consider arguments while overturning laws for money.

Hope that helps clear up what happened today.

One of the few highlights from today.👇

MR. DREEBEN: There are lawful mechanisms to contest the results in an election...Petitioner and his allies filed dozens of electoral challenges and, in my understanding, lost all but one that was not outcome determinative in any respect.

Samuel Alito is 74. Clarence Thomas is 75. Roberts and Sotomayor are 69. The next president may very well nominate replacements for multiple (if not all!) of these justices. If Trump is president, the Supreme Court is gone for the rest of our lifetimes. That means an all-powerful…

Every dictator who ever seized power justified his coup as an official act for the good of the state.

Ensuring that Trump stands trial and receives a verdict before Election Day is not a partisan issue. Three fifths of Americans believe the trial should happen before the election. ipsos.com/en-us/most-ame…

Fun fact -- Mike Roman, the Trump co-defendant in Georgia who lobbed the disgusting smear campaign against Fani Willis, has now just been indicted AGAIN, this time in Arizona. FAFO.

“A republic, if you can keep it.”

Benjamin Franklin's response to Elizabeth Willing Powel's question:

'Well, Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?”
-Stated during the Constitutional Convention, on September 17, 1787.

The assassination of political rivals as an official act.

Understand what the Trump team is arguing for here. Take it seriously and at face value.

This is not a game.

The trial judge in the E. Jean Carroll case has denied Trump's motion for a new trial or to direct judgment against Carroll. I'm told the opinion, which I haven't seen yet, is scathing. This from Carroll's lawyer, Robbie Kaplan:

During his first impeachment trial, Trump’s lawyers argued that he could not be impeached for any act, no matter how criminal, if the president believed it was in the country’s interest.

Now they argue that the only remedy for killing a political opponent is impeachment.

The…

From Judge Kaplan's ruling affirming E. Jean Carroll's award:

'Mr. Trump’s malicious and unceasing attacks on Ms. Carroll were disseminated to more than 100 million people. They included public threats and personal attacks, and they endangered Ms. Carroll’s health and safety.'

SCOTUS arguments did nothing to ease my concern that they’re going to drag this out as long as possible.

Pretty clear that they’re at least considering sending some of this back to the lower courts —and potentially opening the appeal window up again—to maximize the delay. 🙄

Private Eyes!!

Listen to her very closely, the difference between a Presidential and a Private, Personal act.

Jack's Florida case is as a Citizen!

The question is, where is the line between Private and Presidential.

He stole the docs as a President but he held them Hostage…

Sam Alito is a stain on the judiciary, an embarrassment to the Supreme Court and America.

Can we just take stock of what an insane 24 hour stretch we're in:

• Trump's lawyers want presidential immunity for coups and assassinations

• in the middle of a trial where Pecker is explaining how they rigged 2016 for Trump

• as the NYT is pulling a National Enquirer and…

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass, reading texts between former National Enquirer editor-in-chief Dylan Howard and Howard's unnamed relative:

Howard: 'He's just been named President-elect.'

Howard: 'At least if he wins I will be pardoned for electoral fraud.'

NEW: David Pecker confesses that he structured Karen McDougal's agreement purposefully to avoid triggering campaign finance law and even sought election law advice. Why? 1/

J: did you argue your 'clear statement' with the DC Circuit? I think this argument is forfeited because you didn't raise it in the lower courts. You asked for immunity. Sauer: they're closely related. J: that's totally circular. You used the argument to AVOID constitutional…