Supreme Court agrees to decide Trump immunity claim

MSG Stan Hutchison https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/washington-times/

PO1 William "Chip" Nagel - And the Washington Times totally has the procedural requirements backwards in that story. What the USSC has agreed to do is to expedite a review of the petition, not to actually hear/decide the case. In that case, there is only a requirement that four of the justices agree to review the petition. They set out a deadline for Trump's attorneys to file their response to Smith's motion next week. Then they will then decide if they will actually hear the case and if so, will it be expedited to hear and resolve.
This is pretty much like what happened in the US v Nixon case regarding the requirement that Nixon hand over documents, etc. on the Watergate conspiracy trial. Nixon refused to do so. The AG office went directly to the USSC and requested an expedited review and hearing on the case. After opposing counsel filed their response, the USSC voted and heard the case within a week after briefs were filed. After their opinion was handed down a week later, Nixon resigned.

I don't follow how that could happen. Wishful thinking? Are you conceding 2024 to Trump? What special powers would Biden have to prevent it? At least four Justices felt the issue was important enough to give a look, only one more and Trump has his victory.

MAJ Montgomery Granger - You don't follow how that if a President can be immune from prosecution, especially for interfering with the peaceful transfer of power, that another President won't also feel emboldened to interfere with the peaceful transfer of power? If you don't see that, I can't help you.

And, four judges agreed to review the case. That doesn't necessarily mean that they agree with Trump's argument. It just means they think the matter is important enough to quickly resolve. Don't count your chickens before they hatch.