[tomder55]

Illinois is a “partially open” primary state. This allows voters to cross party lines, however, they must first publicly declare their ballot choice.

Illinois Primary Election Process | VOTE411

[Wondergirl]

Illinois Primary Election Process | VOTE411

I've lived here since 1963, I have lived in several different counties. I have NEVER been asked this.

[jlisenbe]

More voter irregularities in Illinois. Anyone here surprised?

[tomder55]

I am just going by what the rules of the State say.

Ballotpedia has the same regulations cited

In Illinois, a voter states his or her affiliation with a political party at the polling place in order to vote in that party's primary.

Primary elections in Illinois - Ballotpedia

[Wondergirl]

More voter irregularities in Illinois. Anyone here surprised?

Not irregularities. It's none of their beeswax. And the county people know it isn't.

[tomder55]

It's a good system . The graveyard residents don't have to register

[tomder55]

It's none of their beeswax. And the county people know it isn't.

It's the Daley machine way

Key Largo - Johnny Rocco runs it down (youtube.com)

[Wondergirl]

No,the nasty workers at the voting booths or who open the mail-in ballots can toss the ballots that don't vote for Trump.

[tomder55]

In Chi town ? The town of "vote early vote often" ? As long as states foolishly allow drop boxes there is always the potential for ballot stuffing fraud .

[Wondergirl]

Drop boxes will not be available. And Illinois is a lot bigger than Chicago.

[tomder55]

Mail Ballot Drop Box Locations | Cook County Clerk (cookcountyclerkil.gov)

Drop Boxes
This legislation permits election officials to install drop box sites where voters can submit mail-in ballots without postage. Election officials must collect and process all ballots at the close of each business day, and voters can return vote by mail ballots at any collection site through the close of polls on Election Day. Ensuring voter safety is paramount, and all collection sites must be secured by locks and only opened by election authority personnel. To further bolster security, the State Board of Elections can establish additional guidelines for the collection sites.
Curbside Voting
The legislation permits local election authorities to establish curbside voting for individuals to cast a ballot during early voting or on Election Day. Curbside voting allows certain voters to complete their ballot from their vehicle in a designated zone outside of the polling place. Prior to the new law, this option was only available to voters with a temporary or permanent disability, who may face difficulties entering the polling place. In this instance, the voter may request that two election judges—at least one from the Democratic Party and one from the Republican party—deliver a ballot to the voter at each vehicle where curbside voting is taking place.

Gov. Pritzker Signs Legislation Strengthening Voting Access for Most Vulnerable Residents (illinois.gov)

[tomder55]

The real goal (besides getting Trump which is obvious)

If the Dems win their lawfare campaign they deny the people the right to elect leaders outside the swamp or any candidate they don't like for that matter.

If the Dems lose (like they already did with the attempts to keep Trump from the ballot ) then they rail against SCOTUS and set the stage for them to pack SCOTUS ;effectively turning it into an appointed for life legislative body.

This was the goal when FDR threatened to pack the court after the Court swiftly ruled much of his New Deal proposals were unconstitutional. His gambit was defeated ;but it was mission accomplished. SCOTUS was duly intimidated .Other legislation and abuses of power that he and the Dems proposed became law.

I don't think it will come to that. I think SCOTUS will give Trump a big rejection in his attempt to claim he had "absolute immunity" . The question will be how much immunity does SCOTUS find to be constitutional ?


Contrast that to the hands off treatment Quid got from (Republican) prosecutor Robert Hur. Quid is left to be judged in the court of public opinion called the elections . That is where Trump's cases belong.

[tomder55]

Trump filed a brief with SCOTUS Tuesday regarding his claim of Presidential Immunity.

“a denial of criminal immunity would incapacitate every future President with de facto blackmail and extortion while in office, and condemn him to years of post-office trauma at the hands of political opponents.”

2024-03-19 - US v. Trump - No. 23-939 - Brief of Petitioner - Final with Tables (002).pdf (supremecourt.gov)

That seems to be a compelling argument as the warfare against Trump demonstrates.

All of Jack Smith's prosecutions of Trump depend on how SCOTUS rules on this issue. The oral arguments are set for April 25 . SCOTUS should rule no later than the end of June when the current session concludes.

Another case affecting Trump but directly affecting those charged for the Jan 6 riot will also be heard.

DOJ slapped them with 1512(c)(2), obstruction of an official proceeding. charges

Fischer v. United States - SCOTUSblog

330 protesters have been charged ;and about half of Smith's charges against Trump are related .

Judge Beryl Howell (who has sentenced some of the rioters to harsh sentences ) warned prosecutors in December that the cases will backlog the system and suggested that plea deals should be made with the 327 defendants charged .

Howell said from the bench Friday she has heard from fellow judges in Washington's federal district court that they have already come across requests from Jan. 6 defendants who are either charged with or have pleaded guilty to the obstruction charge and are now asking to pause proceedings until the Supreme Court determines whether the statute can be applied to Jan. 6-related conduct.
Howell said that such requests are not "unreasonable" and suggested a federal prosecutor narrow a plea offer involving the 1512 count to focus on another charge to avoid delaying the case. Howell indicated the judges in the court could encounter backlogs in scheduling because of the high court's review.

Federal judge warns of Jan. 6 case backlog as Supreme Court weighs key obstruction statute - CBS News

Some have been released . Most have been delayed awaiting a SCOTUS ruling.

[tomder55]

18 U.S.C. 1512(c)(2) This is that law that is being used against roughly 350 Jan 6 folks taking selfies in the Capitol . It is also the key statute in Jack Smiths Jan 6 case against Trump.

(c)Whoever corruptly—(2)otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so,

shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.

18 U.S. Code § 1512 - Tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant | U.S. Code | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute (cornell.edu)


This is a post Enron law to prevent witness tampering and evidence destruction. It had nothing to do with obstructing Congress from doing an official act.

That is why SCOTUS is hearing oral arguments in the Fisher case challenging the constitutionality of the charges. They are political protesters ;not corporate fraudsters .
It is the ONLY charge against 55 cases .For many others ,counts commonly include nonviolent misdemeanors such as parading in the Capitol or disorderly conduct.
Some like Fisher have violence charges against them . But this particular law has a max sentence of 20 years ;and sentences are already harsh

And more is coming . The Solicitor General arguing the case for Quid ;Elizabeth Prelogar; wants to pile on with Jan 6 being a “uniquely horrifying event” causing “a significant disruption of a governmental function,”

[tomder55]

Prelogar is a former clerk for AG Garland and Associate Justice Elena Kagan . She basically admitted in arguments that 18 U.S.C. 1512 is being unevenly applied to Jan 6 defendants and is not being used in other protesters who engage in similar conduct (ie the violence during the George Floyd protests or the Antifa insurrection .

Her testimony has been at best misleading

​���� on X: "The offer the DOJ sent me in August 2021, was a take it or leave it deal to plead guilty to 18 U.S.C. 1512(c)(2) with a range of 41 to 51 months. I refused. Yesterday the Solicitor General told the Supreme Court that non-violent J6ers without priors only face 24 to 26 months for https://t.co/I1FbCvnveJ" / X (twitter.com)


A good summary is found in SCOTUSblog
Justices divided over Jan. 6 participant’s call to throw out obstruction charge - SCOTUSblog

[tomder55]

Reading SCOTUSblog take on written arguments filed by Trump and Jack Smith prior to oral arguments about Presidential immunity . Oral arguments are today.

Smith appears to believe that no President has immunity because the rule of law is the
'safeguard" . His take is roll on the floor laughable if you know how Trump has been treated by the DOJ.


"The Supreme Court’s decision in Nixon v. Fitzgerald, holding that presidents are immune from civil lawsuits by private parties seeking damages, does not shield former presidents from federal criminal liability, Smith argues. There is a “far weightier interest in vindicating federal criminal law” in a case brought by the executive branch than a civil case brought by a private party, Smith contends. And while the justices in Fitzgerald were worried about the prospect that a flood of private civil suits would affect the president’s decision making, Smith observes that there are a variety of safeguards – ranging from grand juries to the burden of proof at trial and due process protections – to ensure that “prosecutions will be screened under rigorous standards and that no President need be chilled in fulfilling his responsibilities by the understanding that he is subject to prosecution if he commits federal crimes.”

Supreme Court to hear Trump’s bid for criminal immunity - SCOTUSblog

Smith needs to be hired by Babylon Bee. He is a fabulous comedy writer .

[tomder55]

So the question comes down to ;do you want a President who is too afraid to make decisions because of potential indictments once out of power ?

Trump's lawyer D. John Saur argued .......

"If a president can be charged, put on trial, and imprisoned for his most controversial decisions as soon as he leaves office, that looming threat will distort the president's decision making precisely when bold and fearless action is most needed,"

Michael Dreeben for the DOJ said

"Such presidential immunity has no foundation in the Constitution," "The Framers knew too well the dangers of a king who could do no wrong. They therefore devised a system to check abuses of power, especially the use of official power for private gain."

23-939_l5gm.pdf (supremecourt.gov)


Saur did not dispute that Trump could be prosecuted for private acts ;or even public acts AFTER an impeachment conviction .
A fair reading of the Constitution makes that clear

Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.

Article Sec 3 Clause 7

Dreeben conceded that there were some acts a President has immunity for.


It's a tough call and I think SCOTUS will do a Solomonic decision conceding some points while not granting absolute immunity . One of the checks on Presidential power is their liability . Nixon wasn't impeached but still it took a pardon to ultimately clear him.

In Trump's case the question is can a former President be legally harassed by the deep state for acts he took public and private ;before ;during ;and after his term for the audacity of running a campaign ,and winning without their approval.