No. of Recommendations: 3
They haven't crowned a king quite yet. But it is setting the stage to do so. The district court will make their determination, and it will almost certainly get appealed. The appellate court then gets a crack at it - and no matter what they decide, it will get appealed to the USSC. Again. Then if they say this is a core presidential duty because everything a president does is legal (thanks Richard) - oops, I mean a core presidential duty, they will have put the crown on his head.
OK, Peter, I'm getting cynical. If we lose 3 of 4 charges in Jack's case because they depend on conspiracy with advisors- Do you have any idea where these inadmissible advisor conversations stop? I assume the secretary overhearing a conversation is out, but just how far down the conspiracy chain does it go? I would think only the person talking directly to Trump may not be admissible.
It seems to me that if the conversation is outside of his core duties, say a conversation with Roger Stone regarding the fake elector scheme (which should be outside) as an example. This was the point I was driving at with Albaby, and it seems it's going to make it very hard to deal with a criminal type getting into that office.
The Supremes knew this when they decided the case too. Well, fireworks were good tonight, but I'm disheartened.
