Skip to content

50 thoughts on “Trump will officially become a felon tomorrow

  1. Salamander

    About time. We all know it will be some cotton ball wrist slap, but given my druthers, he'd have to spend Friday through inauguration day in a cell at Rikers, like the other felons, and wear an ankle monitor during his time in the
    White House. Also, and not leave town for the duration. No more pricey (to us taxpayers) trips to his innumerable properties. He can set up a minigolf course in Melania's Spoiled Rose Garden.

    Yes, I know I'm delusional.

    1. Dave_MB32

      I was reading that New Jersey was going to pull his liquor licenses because a felon can't hold the liquor license or be the ultimate beneficiary. If it goes through, his golf courses, his restaurants won't be able to serve alcohol as long as he owns them.

      Many other states have similar statutes, but haven't been as aggressive as NJ. If NJ lowers the boom, the other states might follow suit.

      1. rick_jones

        I'm sure his ego wouldn't cope with it anyway, but losing the liquor licenses on his properties or having to (at least on paper) divest them sounds like a more grounded reason for him to want to see the sentencing quashed.

        1. Dave_MB32

          The liquor licenses are in Don, Jr.'s name. Tump is the beneficial owner of the Revocable Trump Trust. He would have to not be a beneficial owner of the properties.

  2. Vog46

    fake news!
    It was a witch hunt
    The Dems have done much worse (Chappaquiddick anyone?)
    This is why we have to close the borders!!
    Did I miss anything?

    1. Josef

      And give up the opportunity to paint himself as the victim? I wouldn't be surprised if he turned it into a rally like event with self praise and self adulation, with his numerous sychophants there to bolster his claims. His creepy V.P, his even creepier shadow v.p. and maybe a woman for the sake of diversity.

      1. FrankM

        I thought he had to appear, at least virtually. If he didn't appear, there would be no sentencing, but that would prevent him from appealing and the case would hang over him for the next four years. (Maybe some legal eagle can clarify).

        1. SeanT

          yeah, my error I misread your initial post and inserted "in person" when I read it.
          Yes, he does have to participate in the sentencing

  3. kenalovell

    I bet Trump is seeking advice on how he can fire Barrett, who has turned out to be so disloyal. I mean he appointed her so surely he can fire her! It's only common sense.

    1. Marlowe

      He doesn't have to fire her, just announce he is replacing her and expect her to resign. It's been working with all the other spineless SOBs like Wray.

      1. Altoid

        +1

        (Also a novel and interesting reading of the appointments clause that I bet these same four justices would agree with if they had the chance to rule on him giving it a shot)

  4. raoul

    It was 5-4 with the usual suspects siding with Trump. I am curious to know on what grounds did the minority think it could intervene on what appears to be strictly a state matter.

    1. mudwall jackson

      on what grounds? it's trump. that's more than enough for thomas and alito. i'm sure the other two could cobble up some legal "reasoning" that to give the court "jurisdiction."

    2. NotCynicalEnough

      It is still the "Through the looking glass" court; as with the law and the constitution, states rights mean exactly what they want it to mean, nothing more and nothing less. And the words don't have to mean the same thing all the time.

  5. rick_jones

    Good news. I would have preferred it were Roberts penning the rejection since he was a GOP appointee.

    The list of justices at the end there is of course telling…

  6. SwamiRedux

    Kinda scary that 4 of the 9 Justices are prepared to do anything for Trump. Doesn't bode well for the next 4 years.

    1. rick_jones

      If it is indeed just four of the nine then it isn’t that scary. What makes it scary are wondering how often one or two more will go along.

      1. SwamiRedux

        True. We'll see how it goes when Trump inevitably appeals the 11th Circuit decision allowing partial publication of Jack Smith's report.

    2. akapneogy

      And then there is the question of whether the felon-to-be called Alito to influence his vote. I think we are well past boding ill territory.

    3. OldFlyer

      By the time Trump 2.0, backed by his trifecta, "amends" voter registration laws, state count challenging laws, and electoral certification laws, "not boding well" will last a lot more than 4 years.

      A lot more.

  7. SeanT

    Barrett is interesting. curious the reasoning there.
    For Roberts, this was clearly a political vote. Trying to wipe some of the stain off his court with his vote.

    1. Dana Decker

      Barrett is not ultra hard-core conservative. I think that's because in the rush to fill Ginsburg's seat, there was less vetting than if there were months to check her out.

      1. rick_jones

        With all the stories about how whatever organization was behind Project 2025 and all the advance planning, and how it was the culmination of so many years planning, you'd think that they or some other organization, seeing Ginsburg's precarious health in the last couple years of her life, would have drawn-up lists of "reliably conservative" replacements.

        1. Altoid

          They *always* have a list ready, and it's probably at least 10 or 20 names long at all times. (Liberal groups do too, or they should; they just don't have more money than God the way Leo does.)

          What happened with Barrett, I think, is that she's an academic and young for the job and apparently thinks life tenure means "no conditions" so she can call them as she sees them, like she would in a faculty slot.

          She's still very, very far on the right fringe. However, she's shown traces of a distressing (for her patrons) tendency to think that maybe the real world could have some influence on how she decides cases, rather than just following through on doctrinaire positions or predetermined conclusions. So I think the lists are about to be revised to downgrade profs in favor of sitting judges.

      2. kenalovell

        She may think she's done her duty by the Lord by ending the abomination of Roe, so now it's time to carry on the good work by curbing the abomination who just got elected president.

      3. Max in WolfSuit

        I disagree with Barrett most of the time, but I also giver her credit. She actually seems to take her job seriously, unlike the others on the right wing of the Court.

      1. NotCynicalEnough

        I'm guessing he will rapidly become a far right hero after being "assassinated" by the deep state police merely for exercising his 2nd amendment rights. I mean, the dude was white, he can't possibly be a criminal, can he? We have entered bizarro world where everything is turned upside down.

        1. kenalovell

          He was obviously another Clinton murder victim. Like Hillary was going to leave him free to look for the real pizza shop sex trafficking basement.

    1. Marlowe

      The only mitzvah that will ever be associated with the mamzer and goniff known as Drumpf will be when he chokes on his last Big Mac. Cue Bob Dylan:

      And I hope that you die
      And your death will come soon
      I'll follow your casket
      By the pale afternoon
      And I'll watch while you're lowered
      Down to your deathbed
      And I'll stand over your grave
      'Til I'm sure that you're dead

  8. D_Ohrk_E1

    I triple dare everyone throughout the world to address him as, convicted felon President Trump, starting January 20, for the next 4 years.

    Bonus points for members of the media and everyone who has been sued at least once by Trump.

    Double-bonus points if you do it on live TV.

    1. Marlowe

      That's triple dog dare.

      And quadruple points for the first spineless member of the (supposedly) non-right wing media to non-ironically refer to the Gulf of America. (That may take a little time, say by the fall, but it'll happen. Bet on it, and the initial favorites would be the Bezos Post and the billionaire-run LA Times.)

  9. lawnorder

    Trump became a felon when he first committed a felony. He became a convicted felon when the jury foreman said "guilty". Being sentenced or not sentenced does not affect Trump's status as a convicted felon one iota.

  10. jdubs

    This ruling will be used by Robert's, Fox News and gullible NY Times/WaPo journalists to excuse future extremist rulings by the court. Or to explain how new Justice Cannon will actually be bringing balance to the court....

    Well they aren't actually GOP extremist super-politicians because look how they voted against Trump in a low stakes case that had no impact.....

  11. KJK

    Headline: Alito, Gorsuch, Thomas, and Kavanaugh, reliably obedient, eager, and ready to "service" Mango Mussolini.

    Likely the rest of the Christian Nationalists members of SCOTUS will step in to make sure that Jack Smith's reports never see the light of day. Only need to delay it for another 10 days (and a few hours) when Trump and his goose steppers take over DOJ.

  12. pjcamp1905

    Yeah. No punishment at all. Jail time is clearly not happening. But at least a big fine? How would that have any bearing on his ability to be president?

Comments are closed.