After moving to throw out the “entire” case, arguing that Trump couldn’t establish jurisdiction and failed to state a claim, the BBC defendants anticipated that extensive Jan. 6-related discovery would show Trump can’t “prove that he did not foment or incite the January 6 Capitol riot.”
“[H]e cannot now prevent Defendants from seeking records that would shed light on his true knowledge, intent, and state of mind in delivering his speech at the Ellipse,” the defendants argued.
The Supreme Court can’t generally rule on civil cases. This is the blunder. In a civil case both sides are equal and he can’t hide behind presidential privilege.
Generally.
The supreme court isn’t supposed to be able to make the president a completely unaccountable oligarch either, yet here we are.
Look, I really do hope you are right, that this goes somewhere and has some actual consequences. But we can’t count on it. We HAVE to assume that he will wriggle out of this like he has so far in every other situation.
The supreme court is (for 6 of the 9 anyway) nothing but a bought and owned institution. What they should do or normally do is out the window.
Of course he’ll get out of it theres countless evil republicans just smart enough to be able to help him get away with any law he breaks.