by oldedude on January 20, 2024 7:58 am
And curt-
I don't understand the reasoning of this. I haven't looked at Lead's legal team, but I've seen stupider things. Not many, but some. It doesn't make sense to me either. My interest is in how they'll explain it so it does make sense. The only thing trumpster should have stuck with was the issue regarding not having a trial. He should leave it at that.
Like I said earlier, if this is about getting his hat in the SCOTUS ring, this is weak at best. And, he couldn't use the same reasoning as the CO GOP. He doesn't have standing if he said the same thing as them. My guess (again) is that he wants to show he did something. And if it doesn't work, he can blame the court.
by Ponderer on January 21, 2024 9:13 am
My guess is that Trump's legal team will figure out some way to argue for this. But it will fall on very insulted judges' ears on appeal.
All of his defenses are asinine. His layers must be getting money out of him somehow, or they wouldn't be destroying their own careers, looking like such pig-ignorant morons for him like this.
Hmm, interesting that Trump's team would go with the "officer of the United States" argument as their primary argument (as it has been described elsewhere). Trump usually prefers more political arguments that would appeal to his cult followers.
