[U] Special Counsel Urges All Due Expediency, In Supremes' Review Of Tangerine's Specious "Absolute Immunity" Claims...

Updated 12.23.2023 @ 11 AM: Well, it is not much of a win for Tangerine, as now he will have to convince a three judge appellate panel that he has absolute immunity (he doesn't) -- but the Supremes won't rule on that pre-trial request from the Special Counsel (for now). End updated portion.

Let's stipulate at the outset, that if Tangerine actually believed he had a meritorious defense, he'd be rushing -- sprinting, in fact -- to have the Supremes decide it for him, so his deck would be clear by the time of the GOP Convention (where he will, no doubt, be seeking a nomination).

But he seeks the opposite: he doesn't want any trial held -- or even a defense motion, resolved -- before the 2024 cycle concludes.

We may thus fairly infer that he knows -- dead to rights -- on at least a few of the 93 counts. . . he will be found guilty -- of felonies. In any event, just filed overnight -- here it is, all ten pages, from special counsel Jack Smith's office (calling BS on him), and a bit:

. . .Respondent [Trump] agrees that the question whether a former president of the United States, enjoys absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for a conspiracy to overturn an election -- and thereby prevent the lawful winner from taking office -- is an issue of great Constitutional moment. . . .

Respondents principal argument in opposition, is that this Court should wait.

That is incorrect. This Court’s immediate review of that question is the only way to achieve its timely and definitive resolution. . . .

[Trump's] immunity claim implicates issues that are central to the rule of law. Contrary to respondent’s characterization (Br. in Opp. 8-10), the indictment alleges serious criminal conduct: that respondent, while serving as President and a candidate for reelection, conspired to thwart the lawful transfer of power through (1) fraud against the United States to impair, obstruct, and defeat the federal government’s collection, counting, and certification of the results of the election; (2) corruptly obstructing the proceeding conducted by the Joint Session of Congress to confirm the electoral vote; and (3) depriving millions of citizens of their right to have their votes counted. Enforcing federal criminal laws that prohibit such conduct is vital to protecting our constitutional processes and democracy itself. . . .

Now you know. . . what a pathetic path he now treads (how can his acolytes be so. . .blind?). Onward, grinning among the cacti. . . .

नमस्ते