And further, I think there were questions from some Justices about the fairness of allowing partisan local and state officials to prosecute a nationally elected President (or ex-President). BINGO.
The first transaction was booked in February. You are right about Trump having delegated control of the Trump Organization to Eric and Don Jr. But the jury verdict makes that point moot. What I’m addressing is a broader question; beyond the particulars about the merits or demerits of the case, a broad immunity decision can’t help but impact the Bragg case.
The Dean Phillips trial balloon is the big tell. Internal party polling must be horrendous. But beyond that, there’s the chance that Trump will be vindicated on every front by a decisive immunity ruling by the highest court.
Local DA’s will time indictments and trials for Republicans close enough to the elections so that even if the verdict gets overturned, it’ll be too late.
My point is that the Bragg case can not escape the impact of a ruling affirming broad presidential immunity. Justice Roberts is an institutionalist. What the Democrats have done in weaponizing the justice system to cripple or hobble Candidates for presidential office has gotten even Roberts’ attention. During oral arguments, he sided with Alito, Thomas, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh. Justice Coney is a wild card. But there’s reason to be hopeful.
To say nothing of the political and psychological impact such a game changing ruling will have. Trump will be vindicated. The US v Fischer will blow up the rest of Jack Smith’s J6 case.