Posted on 03/14/2024 3:06:39 PM PDT by Coronal
I'm still not following the point you're trying to make.
The Carroll case was a civil case where President Trump was found liable (not guilty). The documents case in Florida is a felony criminal case.
You're wrong on the law. "Summary judgment" only applies to civil cases in the United States. In criminal cases, the defendant is entitled to a jury trial so a summary judgment is not allowed. President Trump could not have possibly "asked for a summary judgment to dismiss" as you stated.
What is "asking for summary judgment" versus "he got a summary judgment" supposed to imply? In the Carroll case, it was Carroll's team that asked for a summary judgment and the judge partially granted it. In the James case, she asked for summary judgment and Ergoron granted that, too.
It was President Trump who filed a motion to dismiss in the federal documents case claiming that the Presidential Records Act was too vague to defend against. This is not asking for a "summary judgment." The judge declined to rule on the motion now, but did not rule out making a ruling later.
The Trump team also filed a motion to dismiss the charges based on selective prosecution following the Hur Report regarding Biden and documents. The judge has not ruled on that motion yet. I hypothesized above that the judge might have deferred on granting the motion to dismiss via the Presidential Records Act because she might be considering dismissing based on selective prosecution, making setting a precedent on the Presidential Records Act unripe at this time. That's what I was thinking when I said "often look for" ways to defer ruling on something until later.
So I ask again, what was your point of attacking me by referencing the Carroll civil case in New York in a thread about the federal documents case in Florida?
-PJ
his point was that he’s dying for everyone to know he’s a full blown leftard which, by definition, have zero interest in facts or truth.
thanks, btw, for your summary of the case. I think you’re right; it seems blatant to me that she’ll dismiss based on the fact that the law is not evenly being applied.
Last week I decided to read his posting history back to 2002 to see if maybe someone took over his screen name at some point.
What I found was a sincere (moderate to conservative) person who went through a difficult personal time in 2002-2003, reconnected with his religious beliefs, and moved forward with his life. However, sometime during the McCain campaign something seems to have "broken" and he started to become antagonistic towards others. His postings got fewer and farther between (I'm talking 9-12 months between posts for a few years) and then went from thought-out pieces to one-liners and digs at others as we moved through the Romney campaign and into the Trump presidency.
I don't know why, but I also don't think anymore that he's left-wing plant. He's just gotten angry or disillusioned in his late 60s.
-PJ
p.s. courtesy ping to Joesbucks
As for my political beliefs, those began changing as I realized there was a growing reliance on dirty operatives instead of winning based on ideas for a better country. And I saw early on that people on the Democratic side that were being attacked for failed family values and integrity that in our mind should be disqualified to serve would emerge on our side and be embraced. If a liberal claimed Jewish lasers caused wildfires we’d be howling lefty lunacy. We were all aghast that our children were hearing about oral sex and yet support a rep who tells a reporter to F off.
Remember Limbaugh’s kook test? Yet as time went on, he morphed into pushing the same things that he once said made someone a kook.
Look where we’re at. We’ve become them. And while it’s much more complicated, that is largely why I’ve morphed over the years. I guess to boil it down, conservatives are no longer the honest broker.
I could quibble over a point or two from your post, but I won't. This isn't the time nor the place for that. I'd rather let your post stand as-is.
Thank you for sharing your path; you didn't have to.
-PJ
Very simple... surprised you could not figure it out. The main strategy Trump team is executing is to delay all final verdicts past November 5th 2024. There is always a slim chance any judge can come up with any verdict, regardless of existing law. Why do you think there are so many appeals to higher courts necessary? It is better to keep the litigation going past Nov 5th.
Yes...the fact you’re a never Trumper is obvious ....sweet cheeks.....other than that...it’s just your opinion...and opinions are like a holes ...everyone has one...you might have 2
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.