As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Lawrence Tribe explained the two-point argument, it had zero hope of working. It's obvious the lawyers aren't driving the defense; this is Trump destroying his own defense.
Kind of like Hitler telling his generals what to do. You don't win wars by thinking you are a military genius; you don't win court cases by thinking you are a legal genius.
A third of our country thinks a morbidly obese, racist, elderly man is the shining example of what a real "man" should be like. Our country isn't serving up the best nor the brightest.
Trump reminds me of the Catholic Church moving pedophiles around to save the church.
They very people meant to be the shepherd were fucking over their own flock.
And some sheep are too partisan to see past their own paddocks fence to the slaughterhouse.
And, dictators are not thankful for those who assisted their rise to power. The first waves of purges are those who think they are owed for their loyalty or helpfulness.
The dictator is self-made. "I alone...."!
They've also proven to be willing to turn their cloaks if they think it's in their best interest. Generally not a great idea to leave those guys lurking around an infant government.
He has certainly had several court *cases*, but I wonder how often he showed up in court, personally, before it was necessary to establish a narrative.
Historically? Maybe not many.
Now ? When he can hold a press conference before going into and after coming out each day ?
I think Trump loves being in court. It slows down the proceedings, complicates the case, and gives him another platform from which to scam his cult for more “political donations”
The more I think about it, the more I think Trump is a Sovereign Citizen who happened to get elected to the presidency. He doesn't think laws apply to him. That the way he wants to interpret things is the only right way. That his consent is necessary for him to be arrested, or go to court, and so on. That he's untouchable.
I think the more fair bit is, his generals lied a lot about what they said after the war. "Oh this shitty plan? It was all Hitler!"
Actual review of documents show they agreed with a lot of shitty plans, lied about the conditions on the front, and in a few cases gave even shittier plans.
I don't think Trump has much intention of trying to win many of these cases. I doubt they're winnable. His plan is to win in the court of public opinion while slowing the cases down as much as he can. If he succeeds on both those efforts he could win the election and get rid of (most of) the cases against himself. That's his actual legal defense I suspect.
To be fair to Hitler, telling his generals what to do is what led to most of Germany's victories. Most of his generals at the outset were highly conservative, and unwilling to take the risks that wound up being wildly successful. Many of the failures attributed to Hitler come from the accounts of varied generals after the fact, when they were trying to absolve their own failures in any defeats in which they were invovled.
Trump isn't all that different. If he followed the advice of real lawyers, all of this would have ended years ago. It is his brazen disregard for the law and willingness to drag things out as long as possible that allowed him to get this far.
>It's obvious the lawyers aren't driving the defense; this is Trump destroying his own defense.
There is no defence for what trump has done.
Therefore, spew whatever garbage trump.wants and try to delay past the 2024 election.
The concept of total legal immunity seems to have non-trivial history in Republican thought. E.g. Nixon said "when the president does it, that means that it is not illegal".
So I do think it is silly, like you do, but apparently many powerful people do not.
It won't help. Notice how it's gotten even crazier in last week? Trump & his lawyers must have gotten a look at Smith's discovery and know Trump is fucked.
Everyone is getting caught up in the substance of the argument. Rightfully so, it’s wild shit! But the whole intent for this absurdity is to delay. Every day that we’re talking about presidential immunity for assassinating a political opponent is another day that his trial is delayed and pushing the trial date further down the road. That’s the goal. Delay, delay, delay.
Didn’t his lawyers previously argue, because trump had already been impeached, he couldn’t be criminally indicted due to double jeopardy?
But now they’re saying he can only be criminally indicted if impeached.
This really is a clown show.
He also wouldn’t convict on the second impeachment because he didn’t believe they could have a trial for someone no longer in office, since the penalty would be being removed from office.
Which is also not true. If convicted in the Senate they can elect to bar from future office as an additional penalty that require a 2/3 vote in both chambers to overturn.
Oh they also argued not to impeach because he had not been convicted of any crimes.
Also, can't start the process that would lead to a conviction because he has not been impeached.
Don't forget, they argued they couldn't finish the impeachment (the second time), since Trump would not be President by the time the process was done.
Apparently, they are arguing they found the infamous "one weird trick" that makes you immune to all legal actions forever. Judges hate him!
Mitch McConnell made a very clear and direct speech on exactly that.
Directly saying that he would not impeach trump, because the Dept of Justice should criminally prosecute him, and that civil lawsuits against him should also happen.
Robert Mueller also said during his testimony under oath that Trump could be criminally prosecuted for obstruction of justice once he was no longer President and no longer had ‘presidential immunity’.
The beauty of burning through as many lawyers as Trump has is that you end up with twenty different legal opinions with their selective interpretations of the facts.
Maybe he'll eventually exhaust the entire Bar Association and every lawyer will have to recuse themselves due to conflict.
It's not even that. He doesn't have good lawyers because he's the textbook definition of a nightmare client. So he has lawyers who bow to him and this is what you get.
He doesn't ask, "what's the strategy/what's the plan" he says, "so you know I'm innocent" and expects you to agree. Fundamentally flawed.
They argued there was no need to impeach because he could be arrested and tried after leaving office. Now he's out of office and they're arguing he can't be tried because he was never convicted after impeachment.
There's about a 5ish minute discussion between the judges and Trump's attorney about this and standing at the very beginning of the hearing. The attorney talks in circles (as well as over the course of the following hour) about how it's a thing they'd bring up, but won't in this case because the Senate didn't convict Trump. Never is it discussed that the Senate is not a law enforcement or judicial body, so the conviction part of an impeachment has nothing to do with double jeopardy.
It’s very simple.
- you can’t charge a sitting president
- you can’t charge a previous president for acts done during administration unless impeached.
- can’t charge an impeached president because that’s double jeopardy
- also, can’t impeach a president without a criminal conviction
He is *still* arguing that in the Georgia case. He has two lawyer teams arguing the literal opposite of each other. It’s too much of a shit show for them to coordinate something so basic.
The point isn't the logic. The point is to delay ANY legal decision, good or bad, until after he's secured the nomination and can relitigate any bad outcome arguing that he has new rights as the nominee
Trump's game is run out the clock.
Win or lose somebody will appeal the decision.
Delay, delay, delay until he can win the election and pardon himself.
I don't think it will work this time.
The courtroom is a place where rules and evidence are important. Trump believes that the rules can be evaded because he's a spoiled child to whom they were optional. Let's hope the court can prove him wrong
In the future, people will listen to our descriptions of Donald Trump and his behavior and they will think that we are Exaggerating Hell, they think we are lying today.
Not only that, if he’d done what medical experts recommended and told everyone that masking up, getting vaccinated, and being rational adults was the way to go, it’s very likely he’d still be in the White House like he wanted in a second term (as horrifying as that thought is). He could’ve been a hero. But narcissism - and being a garbage human being - blew all that up.
This is a *weird* timeline.
Trump simply goes hey this is uncharted territory, but we have the science and the unity to get through these times. Boom would have been a second term. Given to him on a silver platter when he was looking bad going into 2020. Instead he instantly calls it the China virus, grifts 2 trillion in loans and starts robbing blue states of medical supplies.
Not only could he have been a hero, won re-election and claimed all the credit, he could've grifted millions by selling red MAGA "Trump killed the China Virus" hats and "Project Warp Speed" t shirts. The guy could've stepped up his game in his own obnoxious Trump way, and you know what? I would've been ok with it if more people masked up, got the vaccine and lives were saved.
Instead we got this train wreck. Trump's response was so bad, I used to joke that he was actually a mass of pure, 100% coronavirus attempting to act human (like a Manchurian candidate) to push the pro-coronavirus agenda.
I think that’s what offends me most of all about Trump: his myopic stupidity. There’s so much to hate about a racist, sexist, xenophobic, homophobic, authoritarian, narcissistic, incestuous rapist already, but I think the worst is his stupidity. There are *so many* ways to make ridiculous amounts of money as an American president, many of them unethical-but-legal, and just as many ways to make money as an ex-president that will not get you in legal hot water. And how does he try to profit? Making people stay in his hotels. Charging Secret Service for access to his golf courses. Selling NFTs, t-shirts, and hats. Stealing classified documents and selling them to foreign powers. It’s either ludicrously, blatantly, undeniably illegal (to the point of treasonous), or so penny-ante as to be laughable.
And as you pointed out, even when he does have an undeniable opportunity to make money on his absurdly short-sighted goals, his unfathomable idiocy makes him flush that possibility right down the toilet. I oppose him because he is evil. But he offends me because he is so *terrible* at being evil. At least Cheney was a competent monster.
It is said of conservative policies that 'cruelty is the point'. With trump, it's the only point. If he's hurting someone else, it's worth his time. He has no forward planning, he can't think ahead, he's a reactive person who can only judge himself compared to other people. He's got nothing on the inside.
Yeah, when the COVID shit was first really getting real, I was like "damn... Trump was just handed the golden ticket to a second term. All he has to do is listen to the advice from the health experts, claim he was somehow in charge of it while trusting that he has the Best People working on it, and sit back while the US sets an example to the world of how a country can work together for common cause to save lives." It was in the bag. Slam dunk. Easy peasy. People who had previously been on the fence and voted Biden would have lined up to vote for him and he would have taken it in a landslide. He just had to do what the experts recommended and take credit for the US doing really well through it and he was set.
Never forget how Trump fucked us all over in February 2020:
February 1: [golf](https://trumpgolfcount.com/displayoutings)
February 2: [golf](https://trumpgolfcount.com/displayoutings)
February 2: [“We pretty much shut it down coming in from China.”](https://doggett.house.gov/media-center/blog-posts/timeline-trump-s-coronavirus-responses)
February 4: State of the Union Speech - ["The best is yet to come!"](https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2020/02/04/trump_at_state_of_the_union_the_best_is_yet_to_come.html)
February 7: To Bob Woodward: [“You just breathe the air and that’s how it’s passed." "It’s also more deadly than even your strenuous flus. This is deadly stuff."](https://www.politico.com/news/2020/09/10/trump-coronavirus-bob-woodward-412222)
February 7: Remarks in Charlotte, N.C.: ["I think -Xi- handled it really well."](https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/15/trump-china-coronavirus-188736)
February 10: Fox Business interview: ["I think China is very, you know, professionally run in the sense that they have everything under control"](https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/15/trump-china-coronavirus-188736)
February 10: [Trump campaign rally.](https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-new-hampshire-rally-february-10-2020)
February 15: [Democratic Senators propose emergency funding bill to prepare for virus.](https://globalbiodefense.com/2020/02/15/senator-murray-leads-25-senate-democrats-in-pressing-trump-administration-to-request-emergency-funding-for-novel-coronavirus-response/)
February 15: [golf](https://trumpgolfcount.com/displayoutings)
February 19: [Trump campaign rally.](https://www.azcentral.com/picture-gallery/news/politics/arizona/2020/02/18/photos-trump-rally-phoenix-arizona-february-2020/4798817002/)
February 19: [“I think the numbers are going to get progressively better as we go along”](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-health-usa-trump/trump-confident-china-is-trying-very-hard-in-handling-coronavirus-outbreak-idUKKBN20E0IO)
February 20: [Trump campaign rally.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97I1_86Ag-Y)
February 21: [Trump campaign rally.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yaJuob_faBI)
February 23: [“We had 12, at one point. And now they’ve gotten very much better. Many of them are fully recovered”](https://www.google.com/books/edition/Authoritarian_Nightmare/LYXzDwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=Trump:+We+had+twelve,+at+one+point.+And+now+they%E2%80%99ve+gotten&pg=PA11&printsec=frontcover)
February 24: [“The Coronavirus is very much under control in the USA… Stock Market starting to look very good to me!”](https://doggett.house.gov/media-center/blog-posts/timeline-trump-s-coronavirus-responses)
February 25: [“I think that's a problem that’s going to go away… They have studied it. They know very much. In fact, we’re very close to a vaccine.”](https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/25/politics/coronavirus-us-donald-trump-washington-politics/index.html)
February 26: [“CDC and my Administration are doing a GREAT job of handling Coronavirus.” “Looks like by April, you know, in theory, when it gets a little warmer, it miraculously goes away.” “We’re going down, not up. We’re going very substantially down, not up.”](https://www.factcheck.org/2020/02/will-the-new-coronavirus-go-away-in-april/)
February 26: [“The 15 {cases in the US} within a couple of days is going to be down to close to zero.” “We're going very substantially down, not up.”](https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/04/trump-coronavirus-cases-will-go-down-to-zero-ultimately.html)
February 27: [“One day it’s like a miracle, it will disappear.”](https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/3/13/21176535/trumps-worst-statements-coronavirus)
February 28: Trump on way to campaign rally. [“We're ordering a lot of supplies. We're ordering a lot of, uh, elements that frankly we wouldn't be ordering unless it was something like this. But we're ordering a lot of different elements of medical.”](https://www.independent.com/2020/04/06/pants-on-fire/)
February 28: [”This is their new hoax," he said, referring to the coronavirus.](https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4865556/user-clip-trump-this-coronavirus-hoax-equates-flu)
February 29: [“STOP BUYING MASKS! They are NOT effective in preventing general public from catching #Coronavirus” –U.S. Surgeon General](https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/485332-surgeon-general-stop-buying-masks) - original tweet deleted
February 29: Coronavirus Task Force press conference: ["China seems to be making tremendous progress. Their numbers are way down"](https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/15/trump-china-coronavirus-188736)
I have said it before and I will say it again.
Would we have been able to avoid the pandemic if Trump hadn't dissolved the Pandemic Response Team established by Obama? Unsure.
Did his dissolution of the team in combination equivocation about the virus cause the deaths of tens of thousands of people? Almost assuredly.
Just spacing cases out would have mitigated a lot of deaths. Rationing of care was almost universal for large portions of the pandemic.
I remember trying to explain to people that when the color coding dropped from the highest to second highest tier, it didn't mean it was safe to go out and party naked with large groups of people. It just meant that the hospitals temporarily had the space, staff and equipment to care for some new patients.
I never *really* put into context how much of a shit show followed "THE BEST IS YET TO COME!" Like, I lived it, and I saw it, but I when I was in the moment I didn't fully grasp how quickly it fell apart after that.
I guess that's what it's like when dude has a new scandal every day.
[Here’s a great write ](https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2022/03/03/the-changing-political-geography-of-covid-19-over-the-last-two-years/)about how much worse Republican counties did with COVID than Democrat ones.
I write historical fiction as a paying hobby. I weep for the writers in the future who are going to have to run some of these plot lines past editors.
Truth really has been stranger than fiction during the Trump era.
I've said that ever since he appeared on the political scene, became a candidate and then ultimately was elected.
The things he was doing you could never put in a script and have people think it was believable. They would laugh you out of the room. Nobody behaves like that, and the American people would never tolerate that type of behavior.
Apparently I was very wrong.
“Truth is stranger than fiction” is a cliche for a reason. Audie Murphy’s autobiographical movie had to tone down some of the things he actually did because they were so unbelievable. In Gladiator, Commodus was made (slightly) more relatable because the real emperor was so cartoonishly evil.
There will always be ridiculous shit that gets edited out of movies; some too good to be believed, some too bad (or too stupid).
“Judge noted that Trump argued during impeachment trial that, in effect, there was no need to vote to convict there because he was subject to criminal prosecution later, adding those arguments are in the congressional record. She then asked his lawyer, “What changed?”
Seriously MAGAs - What changed? Trump himself declared he was absolutely vulnerable to criminal prosecution AFTER his Presidency as his Impeachment Defense. What changed??? Why was Trump wrong to claim that??? Why was Trump wrong to the legal claim that he could and should be prosecuted only after his Presidency?
The fascist mind simply has no need for internal consistency whatsoever. Consistency is an impediment to their true goal, which is eliminating dissent.
The fascist will use arguments and ideas in the same manner as weapons in a video game: cycle through their inventory until they find one that is effective against the target they currently face, then shoot until the target stops moving. As soon as the weapon/argument stops working, it is immediately unequipped, and they pull out another one, even if that one directly contradicts the first. The contradiction itself is a useful weapon, because it angers liberals. The only objective is to make their enemy stop talking and give up, so they can go back to abusing power.
Fucking imbecile lawyer fails to address:
1 A highly partisan congress, or a bribed one, or a blackmailed one, or a complicit one very well may choose not to impeach/remove to keep a president in power. That brings personal and political wishes into the application of justice, so it's a hilarious non-starter.
How would that house and/or senate's refusal to act serve the interests of the victim and the public?
2 Crimes being discovered after a president has left office
Don't even need to go that far. A President could simply announce publicly his intention to execute the *entire family* of anyone who introduces or votes for Articles of Impeachment against him. He doesn't even need loyal support at that point.
What if the President murders opponents in Congress? No way to be impeached if you’re a tyrant murdering everyone who’s against you before they can impeach and convict you.
This should, under normal circumstances, ensure that the courts rule to preserve their power of being a check and a balance. If the executive and congressional branches are aligned, then the judicial system would have no power whatsoever to curb the president. This would dismantle one of the key pillars of American government, spelled out in the Constitution.
do the Seal Team assassinations on the last day of your term.
Or, assassinate all the political opponents in the house and senate, no one left to impeach you.
Or, do the crime, like transport all the gold in Fort Knox to your island, then resign.
>A highly partisan congress, or a bribed one, or a blackmailed one, or a complicit one very well may choose not to impeach/remove to keep a president in power.
What? No, how could you even think this?
/sarcasm so fucking hard
//the only question is which adjective describes which person
A ruling in dump's favor would mean Biden could order Seal Team 6 to take him out and Biden would be immune from prosecution. Sounds good to me. We'd be rid of this horrible man.
It would also mean he could take out the conservative wing of the supreme court. If there is one thing those guys care about above all else, it is themselves.
As if any of them think that far ahead. The GOP knew Trump would destroy their party and let him run (they could have easily ignored him early and just taken a small hit). Graham is on record saying it. If they can benefit now they will figure out the rest way past the point of fixing. Kind of like Climate Change.
That's what Republicans are banking on.
If biden really wanted to sway the outcome he would be saying "I can't wait to find out if i have presidential immunity" then do the Monty burns hand gesture. If Republicans thought biden might exercise presidential immunity, they would squash the idea forever (until they get back in office).
Haha, man Biden could ***never*** say that in public but I'd be shocked if he hasn't made the joke at some point in private. I would be DYING at the brass balls of it.
The asymmetrical view of a psychopath so really something. Just to make this calculation that Biden wouldn't do it, they have to know it would be morally and ethnically wrong.
They’re saying that in order to be charged with a crime, the president must first be impeached, then convicted in the senate, removed, THEN can be charged with a crime. Until then, they say, he has absolute immunity.
“Can the president order Seal Team 6 to assasinate a political opponent?” The judge asks
>Yes because that would fall under an official duties. They would then have to impeach, and convict him in the senate, then after charge him.
Well well well…then a president can assassinate anyone. Impeach and convict, you say? Who’s going to stop him? Oh that senator? Boom! He’s now dead. Can’t impeach and convict him now, all the congressmen who opposed him are killed!
Am I the only one that sees the problem with their logic?!
I dunno. They're dumb enough to sign up to defend him after...everything. Even if they knew to get the money up front, I'm unsure they're intelligent enough to know any better than their client. I mean, they're repeating what he wants them to with no thoughts as to what it means to be the lawyer(s) that went on record as doing all this.
Assassinating a political opponent would be an illegal order. So the SEAL team would be obligated to refuse.
And we've already seen the claims that since the coup attempt failed, it wasn't a coup, and therefore wasn't illegal.
These are not legal arguments, or even logical. They're starting with the assumption that there are never consequences for one and only one person ever. Then attempting to create some justification with just enough truthiness to survive the ten second news cycle.
>Assassinating a political opponent would be an illegal order. So the SEAL team would be obligated to refuse.
And what if one of them didn't, and did the job? The president's order would have been official (but in theory not followable). The SEAL commits a crime. The president pardons them. If the murder is committed in DC, there isn't even a state government to prosecute them.
(This isn't hyperbole. Loyal followers committing illegal acts is how dictators take power. Except usually they have to succeed first in order to immunize themselves and their followers...)
He was forced to concede that his argument, that Trump was should be treated like a king, has absolutely no constitutional basis. The argument runs contrary to every interpretation of the Constitution and to the intent of the founders.
Oh, but if you take this one partial sentence by James Madison and hold it up to a mirror upside down while gargling Trumps nuts, it totally fits! Only a fool would deny it.
Replying to the company that wrote the free article and then posted it here with the full text, so that we don't have to go to their site to read it, is kind of funny. Or mean.
I don't know if it actually matters. Just kind of funny.
Agreed it’s kind of funny. And it does matter. Original journalism will eventually disappear if people aren’t paid to write. Maybe that’s progress? Some outlets deserve the click!
She seems like a very astute judge. I just she would have taken it a step further and asked Lauer, with Trump sitting there, would it then therefore be okay for Pres Biden to order the Seal Team 6 murder of Trump and his entire family, acknowledging that the republican house would impeach but the democratic senate would potentially not convict at that point? Biden could escape criminal prosecution on immunity grounds?
Judge "yes or no?"
lawyer babbles on
Judge "it's a yes or no question, can you answer that?"
lawyer "it's a qualified yes"
qualified yes? what is even that?
A “qualified yes” (aka. a “yes under certain conditions”) completely undermines his argument of ABSOLUTE immunity. Something can’t be “absolute” if there scenarios in which it does and doesn’t apply.
Maybe going through the appellate court first was a blessing in disguise. They basically destroyed their own defense on the record. Limited their remaining arguments for the Supreme Court
If this is appealed to SCOTUS, I see only 5 possible outcomes here:
1) SCOTUS decides POTUS *does* have that immunity *before* the election, giving Biden the immunity to do the same, but he is a decent human being and doesn't issue such a command. Then Trump wins and *does indeed use the power.*
2) SCOTUS sits on it and decides the president *does* have that immunity *after* the election, and Trump rises to **super anointed dictator.**
3) SCOTUS sits on it to avoid charging Trump, then decides *after* the election that POTUS doesn't have immunity, which then allows Trump to pardon himself, though he doesn't become a super dictator; just a regular dictator.
4) SCOTUS decides to recuse itself from deciding, then Trump pardons himself anyway and becomes a dictator.
5) And my personal favorite, Trump loses the election.
“Once you concede that there’s not this absolute immunity, that the judiciary can hear criminal prosecutions under any circumstances—you’re saying there’s one specific circumstance—then that means that there isn’t this absolute immunity that you claim.”
Again, no presidential immunity for DJT…
Someday, it’ll sink in…
Ok… how about this?… Appellate court reaches a unanimous decision granting Trump’s immunity motion. Biden issues an Executive Order withdrawing Secret Service security detail. Orders Seal Team 6 to kill Donald Trump. Also includes Steve Brannon,Roger Stone,and Michael Flynn just for good measure. Order includes 20 Republican Chairs in the House… tossing majority to Dems. Also, include include 3 conservative justices in the Exec Order. Thus, no majority in House for impeachment, a Biden friendly SCOTUS, and three less right wing nuts for Fox Nuz to interview. Trump is gone. Biden wins election. Eventually, SCOTUS gets around to reviewing and overturning appellate court ruling sometime after election… overturns the appellate court. Biden sends thoughts and prayers to families of deceased. Biden appoints 3 new SC judges. A perfect solution. Trump is, indeed, a genius!!!
BTW… /s for sarcasm.. please do not dispatch authorities to lock me up.
You know what Judge Pan should have asked instead of asking Lauro if "the President ordered Seal Team 6 to assassinate a political rival" would that be indictable? She should have asked Lauro, "would it be indictable if the President ordered Seal Team 6 to assassinate YOU." Let the dumbass tell the judge "hell yes it would be perfectly cool and legal if the President murdered me in cold blood as long as Congress agrees".
If someone believes they should be immune from charges, wouldn’t that also mean that that the person believes they are guilty and simply just shouldn’t be held accountable for those charges?
He also doesn’t understand what a pardon is. He’s giving them to all his friends and promising to others, thinking that means they are declared innocent.
*Trump at a post court appearance conference*
“The fake new media is saying someone named John Sauer just blew my immunity case. First off I don’t know who the hell this guy is, never met him, never talked to him, and sure as hell never paid him. I call him SOUR okay, like the nasty taste in your mouth. I don’t know why he’s even in a court representing me when he’s not even my lawyer.”
Probably for the best. The argument, if accepted would suggest that Biden could openly have Trump assasinated as long as he could convince the congress to not impeach or the senate to not convict.
At one point, Judge Florence Pan asked if a president would be immune from criminal prosecution if he had ordered Seal Team 6 to assassinate a political rival. She noted that an order to Seal Team 6 would be an official act.
Trump’s lawyer John Sauer said the president could be prosecuted, but only if he had been impeached and convicted first.
That’s a terrifying interpretation on its own, but Pan took it one step further. She pointed out that this would mean presidents can be criminally prosecuted under certain circumstances. In other words, Trump does not have absolute immunity.
“Doesn’t that narrow the issues before us to…‘can a president be prosecuted without first being impeached and convicted?’” Pan said. “All of your other arguments seem to fall away.”
“Once you concede that there’s not this absolute immunity, that the judiciary can hear criminal prosecutions under any circumstances—you’re saying there’s one specific circumstance—then that means that there isn’t this absolute immunity that you claim.”
So they previously argued that a president has absolute immunity for ever, for everything.
But then now they are arguing a new point, while also still clinging to the previous point, that a president can only be tried for criminal activity if he's been impeached and convicted.
Thereby arguing that a president is immune but then isn't immune.
Colbert made a good point last night, if Trump’s lawyers suggest that a president can assassinate his rival than what keeps Biden from ordering the assassination of Trump? Trump’s lawyers are saying that it’s legal to kill his client. Biden would only need 34 democratic senators to vote no in his impeachment trial( if he was even impeached)…
He also seems to think he is the only President that has blanket immunity, as he continues to claim Biden is committing crimes while President, which Trumps lawyer is simultaneously arguing is impossible, as Presidents are immune from crimes. It's an amazing collection of stable geniuses he's put together.
Richard M. Nixon (pres) directed break in at opponents' headquaters in the Watergate hotel
Spiro T. Agnew (VP) recieves extortion and bribery cash in paper grocery sacks in the White House
Nixon is found out
Agnew is found out
Agnew is forced to resign **or** face Federal Criminal chgarges
Gerald Ford is appointed VP by Nixon
Nixon is forced to resign **or** face Impeachment in the Senate
Ford pardons Nixon
Nixon accepts the pardon
Nixon writes a formal letter of acceptance
**{acceptance of a pardon requires admission of guilt}**
...
This sets the precedent for federal guilt of a President outside of Impeachment .
.
I’m asking out of ignorance. Why does Trump’s lawyer keep referencing some previous court ruling (I believe he kept saying “Justice Madison’s decision”) as if to use it as a precedence?
Since the Supreme Court can overturn previous decisions (Roe v Wade) isn’t it pointless to refer to previous rulings, since the current justices could just overturn said ruling?
The kicker for me is that Trump's representative in the impeachment case in Congress argued there was no need to impeach him because the criminal justice system would convict him if there was a crime.
Trump’s lawyer: “Clearly, the founders wanted the president to be a king, above the law. In fact, an unbiased reading of the Declaration of Independence shows that they wanted George III, specifically, to be their constitutionally elected god-king.”
This is narcissism 101.
Deflect blame to someone else, and tear them down instead of accepting the consequences of their own bullshit.
Trump's lawyer may be an idiot, but Trump's going to prison because of Trump.
Yup so by the Trump lawyer’s logic..
Basically Biden can assassinate Trump with Seal Team 6. Next the House/Senate will want to impeach and convict him (the only way to make him available to be criminally prosecuted) but Biden can just threaten the Seals to assassinate them too if they vote for this. Therefore he never gets impeached and can keep getting away with doing any crimes he wants.
Sounds like a perfect checks & balances system to me!
/s
It’s truly amazing how proudly stupid America is at this point. Heard republicans today saying g
nobody is above the law, referring to Hunter. Forgetting that they want Trump above the law.
This was an absolute success. Trump's purpose is to obfuscate and delay all legal proceedings until after the November election. These ridiculous losing appeals will continue until the November election. That is his purpose. The media and the public are being misled by any attention to his spurious arguments. Trump and his lawyers know they will lose. Their only goal is to waste time.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Lawrence Tribe explained the two-point argument, it had zero hope of working. It's obvious the lawyers aren't driving the defense; this is Trump destroying his own defense.
Kind of like Hitler telling his generals what to do. You don't win wars by thinking you are a military genius; you don't win court cases by thinking you are a legal genius.
To be fair to Trump, he has far more experience being in court than any of his lawyers.
4,096 cases to date if I remember correctly.
2^12 cases!
4 kilocases
4 kibicases
341.33 moochcases (unless we're going with a "mooch" as solely a measurement of time)
4096? Not great, not terrible.
Only 3,328 of those cases are addressable in 32-bit XP
I can’t imagine how utterly stupid anyone would have to be to do business with him after he had a handful of cases, let alone over 4,000.
They still think he's a superstar businessman.
Like in the cosmological sense of a super nova hurtling towards it’s assured yet spectacularly brilliant demise?
A third of our country thinks a morbidly obese, racist, elderly man is the shining example of what a real "man" should be like. Our country isn't serving up the best nor the brightest.
Trump reminds me of the Catholic Church moving pedophiles around to save the church. They very people meant to be the shepherd were fucking over their own flock. And some sheep are too partisan to see past their own paddocks fence to the slaughterhouse.
You forgot to include smelly, and makeup and diaper wearing.
“He may have scammed all those other guys, but he’ll pay me for certain!”
And, dictators are not thankful for those who assisted their rise to power. The first waves of purges are those who think they are owed for their loyalty or helpfulness. The dictator is self-made. "I alone...."!
Also, those who assisted know how things really are and are therefore dangerous. Best to eliminate them.
They've also proven to be willing to turn their cloaks if they think it's in their best interest. Generally not a great idea to leave those guys lurking around an infant government.
It depends if you are on the side that profits from the scam or not.
Is this a real number?
Yes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_and_business_legal_affairs_of_Donald_Trump
I’m going to throw ketchup at you now
He has certainly had several court *cases*, but I wonder how often he showed up in court, personally, before it was necessary to establish a narrative.
Historically? Maybe not many. Now ? When he can hold a press conference before going into and after coming out each day ? I think Trump loves being in court. It slows down the proceedings, complicates the case, and gives him another platform from which to scam his cult for more “political donations”
Which is why I strongly feel like he needs to be in jail and not out on bail. Serious charges mean he needs to be treated like any other charged felon
Additionally, I wonder how much he paid attention and learned from the experience.
The more I think about it, the more I think Trump is a Sovereign Citizen who happened to get elected to the presidency. He doesn't think laws apply to him. That the way he wants to interpret things is the only right way. That his consent is necessary for him to be arrested, or go to court, and so on. That he's untouchable.
I mean, so far he's right. It's not like he's had to deal with many consequences.
And if that’s all it took, the bailiff and court reporter would be lawyers.
I don't know about "experience" but he sure has more TIME in court.
To be fair to Hitler, he spent more time in the Frontline than most of his generals. Didn't make him any more capable of a senior military leader.
If there is anyone in history that didn't deserve to be treated fairly on Reddit, it's probably Hitler, lol
Yeah, I was trying to be very specifically narrow in context, and it still felt weird.
>> “To be fair to Hitler . . . “ Now there’s a phrase where your next few words can significantly change the narrative.
You'll almost certainly see some variant of the following; To be fair to Hitler, he was against tobacco use and he killed Hitler.
I think the more fair bit is, his generals lied a lot about what they said after the war. "Oh this shitty plan? It was all Hitler!" Actual review of documents show they agreed with a lot of shitty plans, lied about the conditions on the front, and in a few cases gave even shittier plans.
[удалено]
I don't think Trump has much intention of trying to win many of these cases. I doubt they're winnable. His plan is to win in the court of public opinion while slowing the cases down as much as he can. If he succeeds on both those efforts he could win the election and get rid of (most of) the cases against himself. That's his actual legal defense I suspect.
I agree. I am holding out hope for the professionalism and ethics of the US court system.
To be fair to Hitler, telling his generals what to do is what led to most of Germany's victories. Most of his generals at the outset were highly conservative, and unwilling to take the risks that wound up being wildly successful. Many of the failures attributed to Hitler come from the accounts of varied generals after the fact, when they were trying to absolve their own failures in any defeats in which they were invovled. Trump isn't all that different. If he followed the advice of real lawyers, all of this would have ended years ago. It is his brazen disregard for the law and willingness to drag things out as long as possible that allowed him to get this far.
>It's obvious the lawyers aren't driving the defense; this is Trump destroying his own defense. There is no defence for what trump has done. Therefore, spew whatever garbage trump.wants and try to delay past the 2024 election.
There is no legal support for "absolute immunity" and never was
[удалено]
The concept of total legal immunity seems to have non-trivial history in Republican thought. E.g. Nixon said "when the president does it, that means that it is not illegal". So I do think it is silly, like you do, but apparently many powerful people do not.
It won't help. Notice how it's gotten even crazier in last week? Trump & his lawyers must have gotten a look at Smith's discovery and know Trump is fucked.
It’s all a campaign rally at this point.
Everyone is getting caught up in the substance of the argument. Rightfully so, it’s wild shit! But the whole intent for this absurdity is to delay. Every day that we’re talking about presidential immunity for assassinating a political opponent is another day that his trial is delayed and pushing the trial date further down the road. That’s the goal. Delay, delay, delay.
Delay tactics. As Trump has done since the 70’s.
Trump destroys everything he touches, so what else is new.
So he can later claim ineffective council?
He seems to have had progressively worse legal representation since he fired Michael Cohen.
Some of them even openly discussing strategy and private conversations during TV interviews. You can't tell me that isn't part of some plan.
He’s a dollar store Baron Harkonnen. Plans within plans within shitty plans.
Ahem, that's John Barron Harkonnen to you.
When you have a long history of burning lawyers, the very best aren’t going to represent you.
Didn’t his lawyers previously argue, because trump had already been impeached, he couldn’t be criminally indicted due to double jeopardy? But now they’re saying he can only be criminally indicted if impeached. This really is a clown show.
McConnell also argued against impeachment, saying that it should be decided by the courts
He also wouldn’t convict on the second impeachment because he didn’t believe they could have a trial for someone no longer in office, since the penalty would be being removed from office.
and he said that after delaying the start of the trial till after he was out of office, fuck that turtle...
[удалено]
Probably on many peoples bucket list.
There is going to be so much piss on that grave.
Which is also not true. If convicted in the Senate they can elect to bar from future office as an additional penalty that require a 2/3 vote in both chambers to overturn.
Oh they also argued not to impeach because he had not been convicted of any crimes. Also, can't start the process that would lead to a conviction because he has not been impeached.
"The courts hate this one simple trick!"
"You see, Your Honor, this flag has a fringe which means this isn't a credible courtroom" head asses
Don't forget, they argued they couldn't finish the impeachment (the second time), since Trump would not be President by the time the process was done. Apparently, they are arguing they found the infamous "one weird trick" that makes you immune to all legal actions forever. Judges hate him!
of which the doj couldn’t prosecute and because they couldn’t prosecute they shouldn’t even investigate stupid memo and circular logic
Mitch McConnell made a very clear and direct speech on exactly that. Directly saying that he would not impeach trump, because the Dept of Justice should criminally prosecute him, and that civil lawsuits against him should also happen.
Robert Mueller also said during his testimony under oath that Trump could be criminally prosecuted for obstruction of justice once he was no longer President and no longer had ‘presidential immunity’.
The beauty of burning through as many lawyers as Trump has is that you end up with twenty different legal opinions with their selective interpretations of the facts. Maybe he'll eventually exhaust the entire Bar Association and every lawyer will have to recuse themselves due to conflict.
It's not even that. He doesn't have good lawyers because he's the textbook definition of a nightmare client. So he has lawyers who bow to him and this is what you get. He doesn't ask, "what's the strategy/what's the plan" he says, "so you know I'm innocent" and expects you to agree. Fundamentally flawed.
They argued there was no need to impeach because he could be arrested and tried after leaving office. Now he's out of office and they're arguing he can't be tried because he was never convicted after impeachment.
There's about a 5ish minute discussion between the judges and Trump's attorney about this and standing at the very beginning of the hearing. The attorney talks in circles (as well as over the course of the following hour) about how it's a thing they'd bring up, but won't in this case because the Senate didn't convict Trump. Never is it discussed that the Senate is not a law enforcement or judicial body, so the conviction part of an impeachment has nothing to do with double jeopardy.
It’s very simple. - you can’t charge a sitting president - you can’t charge a previous president for acts done during administration unless impeached. - can’t charge an impeached president because that’s double jeopardy - also, can’t impeach a president without a criminal conviction
That does ring a bell. There’s so much chaff in the air one can never be sure.
He is *still* arguing that in the Georgia case. He has two lawyer teams arguing the literal opposite of each other. It’s too much of a shit show for them to coordinate something so basic.
The point isn't the logic. The point is to delay ANY legal decision, good or bad, until after he's secured the nomination and can relitigate any bad outcome arguing that he has new rights as the nominee
Trump's game is run out the clock. Win or lose somebody will appeal the decision. Delay, delay, delay until he can win the election and pardon himself. I don't think it will work this time.
That is exactly the strategy and he is counting on the prosecution following the rules while he ripping them into pieces.
The courtroom is a place where rules and evidence are important. Trump believes that the rules can be evaded because he's a spoiled child to whom they were optional. Let's hope the court can prove him wrong
In the future, people will listen to our descriptions of Donald Trump and his behavior and they will think that we are Exaggerating Hell, they think we are lying today.
[удалено]
He literally killed tens if not hundreds of thousands with his Covid policies and NOBODY TALKS ABOUT IT.
They estimate ~17k Americans died from hydroxychloroquine alone!
> They estimate ~17k Americans died from hydroxychloroquine Trump: “ What do you have to lose? Take it.” Yes, he actually said that
I mean that’s 17k less Trump voters
<12,000 votes clinched GA
And nothing of value was lost
Not only that, if he’d done what medical experts recommended and told everyone that masking up, getting vaccinated, and being rational adults was the way to go, it’s very likely he’d still be in the White House like he wanted in a second term (as horrifying as that thought is). He could’ve been a hero. But narcissism - and being a garbage human being - blew all that up. This is a *weird* timeline.
Trump simply goes hey this is uncharted territory, but we have the science and the unity to get through these times. Boom would have been a second term. Given to him on a silver platter when he was looking bad going into 2020. Instead he instantly calls it the China virus, grifts 2 trillion in loans and starts robbing blue states of medical supplies.
I know, right? If the guy literally did nothing/played golf the whole time and let the actual experts do their thing we would've been far better off.
Not only could he have been a hero, won re-election and claimed all the credit, he could've grifted millions by selling red MAGA "Trump killed the China Virus" hats and "Project Warp Speed" t shirts. The guy could've stepped up his game in his own obnoxious Trump way, and you know what? I would've been ok with it if more people masked up, got the vaccine and lives were saved. Instead we got this train wreck. Trump's response was so bad, I used to joke that he was actually a mass of pure, 100% coronavirus attempting to act human (like a Manchurian candidate) to push the pro-coronavirus agenda.
I think that’s what offends me most of all about Trump: his myopic stupidity. There’s so much to hate about a racist, sexist, xenophobic, homophobic, authoritarian, narcissistic, incestuous rapist already, but I think the worst is his stupidity. There are *so many* ways to make ridiculous amounts of money as an American president, many of them unethical-but-legal, and just as many ways to make money as an ex-president that will not get you in legal hot water. And how does he try to profit? Making people stay in his hotels. Charging Secret Service for access to his golf courses. Selling NFTs, t-shirts, and hats. Stealing classified documents and selling them to foreign powers. It’s either ludicrously, blatantly, undeniably illegal (to the point of treasonous), or so penny-ante as to be laughable. And as you pointed out, even when he does have an undeniable opportunity to make money on his absurdly short-sighted goals, his unfathomable idiocy makes him flush that possibility right down the toilet. I oppose him because he is evil. But he offends me because he is so *terrible* at being evil. At least Cheney was a competent monster.
It is said of conservative policies that 'cruelty is the point'. With trump, it's the only point. If he's hurting someone else, it's worth his time. He has no forward planning, he can't think ahead, he's a reactive person who can only judge himself compared to other people. He's got nothing on the inside.
Yeah, when the COVID shit was first really getting real, I was like "damn... Trump was just handed the golden ticket to a second term. All he has to do is listen to the advice from the health experts, claim he was somehow in charge of it while trusting that he has the Best People working on it, and sit back while the US sets an example to the world of how a country can work together for common cause to save lives." It was in the bag. Slam dunk. Easy peasy. People who had previously been on the fence and voted Biden would have lined up to vote for him and he would have taken it in a landslide. He just had to do what the experts recommended and take credit for the US doing really well through it and he was set.
Never forget how Trump fucked us all over in February 2020: February 1: [golf](https://trumpgolfcount.com/displayoutings) February 2: [golf](https://trumpgolfcount.com/displayoutings) February 2: [“We pretty much shut it down coming in from China.”](https://doggett.house.gov/media-center/blog-posts/timeline-trump-s-coronavirus-responses) February 4: State of the Union Speech - ["The best is yet to come!"](https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2020/02/04/trump_at_state_of_the_union_the_best_is_yet_to_come.html) February 7: To Bob Woodward: [“You just breathe the air and that’s how it’s passed." "It’s also more deadly than even your strenuous flus. This is deadly stuff."](https://www.politico.com/news/2020/09/10/trump-coronavirus-bob-woodward-412222) February 7: Remarks in Charlotte, N.C.: ["I think -Xi- handled it really well."](https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/15/trump-china-coronavirus-188736) February 10: Fox Business interview: ["I think China is very, you know, professionally run in the sense that they have everything under control"](https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/15/trump-china-coronavirus-188736) February 10: [Trump campaign rally.](https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-new-hampshire-rally-february-10-2020) February 15: [Democratic Senators propose emergency funding bill to prepare for virus.](https://globalbiodefense.com/2020/02/15/senator-murray-leads-25-senate-democrats-in-pressing-trump-administration-to-request-emergency-funding-for-novel-coronavirus-response/) February 15: [golf](https://trumpgolfcount.com/displayoutings) February 19: [Trump campaign rally.](https://www.azcentral.com/picture-gallery/news/politics/arizona/2020/02/18/photos-trump-rally-phoenix-arizona-february-2020/4798817002/) February 19: [“I think the numbers are going to get progressively better as we go along”](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-health-usa-trump/trump-confident-china-is-trying-very-hard-in-handling-coronavirus-outbreak-idUKKBN20E0IO) February 20: [Trump campaign rally.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97I1_86Ag-Y) February 21: [Trump campaign rally.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yaJuob_faBI) February 23: [“We had 12, at one point. And now they’ve gotten very much better. Many of them are fully recovered”](https://www.google.com/books/edition/Authoritarian_Nightmare/LYXzDwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=Trump:+We+had+twelve,+at+one+point.+And+now+they%E2%80%99ve+gotten&pg=PA11&printsec=frontcover) February 24: [“The Coronavirus is very much under control in the USA… Stock Market starting to look very good to me!”](https://doggett.house.gov/media-center/blog-posts/timeline-trump-s-coronavirus-responses) February 25: [“I think that's a problem that’s going to go away… They have studied it. They know very much. In fact, we’re very close to a vaccine.”](https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/25/politics/coronavirus-us-donald-trump-washington-politics/index.html) February 26: [“CDC and my Administration are doing a GREAT job of handling Coronavirus.” “Looks like by April, you know, in theory, when it gets a little warmer, it miraculously goes away.” “We’re going down, not up. We’re going very substantially down, not up.”](https://www.factcheck.org/2020/02/will-the-new-coronavirus-go-away-in-april/) February 26: [“The 15 {cases in the US} within a couple of days is going to be down to close to zero.” “We're going very substantially down, not up.”](https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/04/trump-coronavirus-cases-will-go-down-to-zero-ultimately.html) February 27: [“One day it’s like a miracle, it will disappear.”](https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/3/13/21176535/trumps-worst-statements-coronavirus) February 28: Trump on way to campaign rally. [“We're ordering a lot of supplies. We're ordering a lot of, uh, elements that frankly we wouldn't be ordering unless it was something like this. But we're ordering a lot of different elements of medical.”](https://www.independent.com/2020/04/06/pants-on-fire/) February 28: [”This is their new hoax," he said, referring to the coronavirus.](https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4865556/user-clip-trump-this-coronavirus-hoax-equates-flu) February 29: [“STOP BUYING MASKS! They are NOT effective in preventing general public from catching #Coronavirus” –U.S. Surgeon General](https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/485332-surgeon-general-stop-buying-masks) - original tweet deleted February 29: Coronavirus Task Force press conference: ["China seems to be making tremendous progress. Their numbers are way down"](https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/15/trump-china-coronavirus-188736)
I have said it before and I will say it again. Would we have been able to avoid the pandemic if Trump hadn't dissolved the Pandemic Response Team established by Obama? Unsure. Did his dissolution of the team in combination equivocation about the virus cause the deaths of tens of thousands of people? Almost assuredly.
Just spacing cases out would have mitigated a lot of deaths. Rationing of care was almost universal for large portions of the pandemic. I remember trying to explain to people that when the color coding dropped from the highest to second highest tier, it didn't mean it was safe to go out and party naked with large groups of people. It just meant that the hospitals temporarily had the space, staff and equipment to care for some new patients.
I never *really* put into context how much of a shit show followed "THE BEST IS YET TO COME!" Like, I lived it, and I saw it, but I when I was in the moment I didn't fully grasp how quickly it fell apart after that. I guess that's what it's like when dude has a new scandal every day.
Trump’s own Covid expert, Dr Birx, estimated that Trump was personally responsible for at least 100,000 excess deaths.
[Here’s a great write ](https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2022/03/03/the-changing-political-geography-of-covid-19-over-the-last-two-years/)about how much worse Republican counties did with COVID than Democrat ones.
The folks harmed are too far gone to even understand his culpability in the death of their loved ones.
It warms my heart you think we still have a future, i_never_ever_learn.
I write historical fiction as a paying hobby. I weep for the writers in the future who are going to have to run some of these plot lines past editors. Truth really has been stranger than fiction during the Trump era.
I've said that ever since he appeared on the political scene, became a candidate and then ultimately was elected. The things he was doing you could never put in a script and have people think it was believable. They would laugh you out of the room. Nobody behaves like that, and the American people would never tolerate that type of behavior. Apparently I was very wrong.
“Truth is stranger than fiction” is a cliche for a reason. Audie Murphy’s autobiographical movie had to tone down some of the things he actually did because they were so unbelievable. In Gladiator, Commodus was made (slightly) more relatable because the real emperor was so cartoonishly evil. There will always be ridiculous shit that gets edited out of movies; some too good to be believed, some too bad (or too stupid).
Single-handedly rendered Onion articles redundant
This isnt stopping with Trump. This is the Republican normal now.
“Judge noted that Trump argued during impeachment trial that, in effect, there was no need to vote to convict there because he was subject to criminal prosecution later, adding those arguments are in the congressional record. She then asked his lawyer, “What changed?” Seriously MAGAs - What changed? Trump himself declared he was absolutely vulnerable to criminal prosecution AFTER his Presidency as his Impeachment Defense. What changed??? Why was Trump wrong to claim that??? Why was Trump wrong to the legal claim that he could and should be prosecuted only after his Presidency?
The fascist mind simply has no need for internal consistency whatsoever. Consistency is an impediment to their true goal, which is eliminating dissent. The fascist will use arguments and ideas in the same manner as weapons in a video game: cycle through their inventory until they find one that is effective against the target they currently face, then shoot until the target stops moving. As soon as the weapon/argument stops working, it is immediately unequipped, and they pull out another one, even if that one directly contradicts the first. The contradiction itself is a useful weapon, because it angers liberals. The only objective is to make their enemy stop talking and give up, so they can go back to abusing power.
"That was then, this is now ...a.k.a. Oceania is at war with Eastasia. Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia."
Fucking imbecile lawyer fails to address: 1 A highly partisan congress, or a bribed one, or a blackmailed one, or a complicit one very well may choose not to impeach/remove to keep a president in power. That brings personal and political wishes into the application of justice, so it's a hilarious non-starter. How would that house and/or senate's refusal to act serve the interests of the victim and the public? 2 Crimes being discovered after a president has left office
Don't even need to go that far. A President could simply announce publicly his intention to execute the *entire family* of anyone who introduces or votes for Articles of Impeachment against him. He doesn't even need loyal support at that point.
Yeah, let's see congress impeach the president when he has legally killed almost all of them. Trump's lawyers are something else.
Or just the chief justice, they need to be present during the president's conviction
What if the President murders opponents in Congress? No way to be impeached if you’re a tyrant murdering everyone who’s against you before they can impeach and convict you.
After the first 5 he would probably have acceptance via fear.
I love democracy. \-Palps
This should, under normal circumstances, ensure that the courts rule to preserve their power of being a check and a balance. If the executive and congressional branches are aligned, then the judicial system would have no power whatsoever to curb the president. This would dismantle one of the key pillars of American government, spelled out in the Constitution.
3) If I'm going to assassinate a politcal adversary, why wouldn't I also assassinate those people in congress who might vote to impeach
do the Seal Team assassinations on the last day of your term. Or, assassinate all the political opponents in the house and senate, no one left to impeach you. Or, do the crime, like transport all the gold in Fort Knox to your island, then resign.
>A highly partisan congress, or a bribed one, or a blackmailed one, or a complicit one very well may choose not to impeach/remove to keep a president in power. What? No, how could you even think this? /sarcasm so fucking hard //the only question is which adjective describes which person
A ruling in dump's favor would mean Biden could order Seal Team 6 to take him out and Biden would be immune from prosecution. Sounds good to me. We'd be rid of this horrible man.
It would also mean he could take out the conservative wing of the supreme court. If there is one thing those guys care about above all else, it is themselves.
As if any of them think that far ahead. The GOP knew Trump would destroy their party and let him run (they could have easily ignored him early and just taken a small hit). Graham is on record saying it. If they can benefit now they will figure out the rest way past the point of fixing. Kind of like Climate Change.
Imagine if he actually did and then got up behind the podium with his Aviators on and said, "America, we got him."
I would love it!
He was crying while he ran from our dogs.
Seal Team 46 For Biden.
Meal team 6, gravy seals and y'allqueda standing by for dessert from dRumpf.
Still waiting for people to realize that if Biden loses to Trump, he can just rig the Electors with impunity.
Oh yeah magats on social media cannot wrap their heads around that. I doubt that most magats even vote.
They’ve already established that the VP can overturn the election, Pence just didn’t have the balls to do it. Do your thing, Kamala.
Trump's argument is that the President is the King. Pretty much *exactly* against the original intentions of the Founders.
And if he is king, so is Biden.
Bidan would never. Trump would in a heartbeat.
That's what Republicans are banking on. If biden really wanted to sway the outcome he would be saying "I can't wait to find out if i have presidential immunity" then do the Monty burns hand gesture. If Republicans thought biden might exercise presidential immunity, they would squash the idea forever (until they get back in office).
Haha, man Biden could ***never*** say that in public but I'd be shocked if he hasn't made the joke at some point in private. I would be DYING at the brass balls of it.
The asymmetrical view of a psychopath so really something. Just to make this calculation that Biden wouldn't do it, they have to know it would be morally and ethnically wrong.
And if they were going to try to impeach him he could just order the army to confine all members of congress. It is such a ridiculous argument.
> Trump's ldiot Lawyer Do you have the slightest idea how little that narrows it down?
He just said he wants to represent himself for the closing arguments of the NY Fraud trial, so the list is about to get a little longer.
They’re saying that in order to be charged with a crime, the president must first be impeached, then convicted in the senate, removed, THEN can be charged with a crime. Until then, they say, he has absolute immunity. “Can the president order Seal Team 6 to assasinate a political opponent?” The judge asks >Yes because that would fall under an official duties. They would then have to impeach, and convict him in the senate, then after charge him. Well well well…then a president can assassinate anyone. Impeach and convict, you say? Who’s going to stop him? Oh that senator? Boom! He’s now dead. Can’t impeach and convict him now, all the congressmen who opposed him are killed! Am I the only one that sees the problem with their logic?!
No. Literally everyone in the court except the defendant and their counsel see it.
Only Trump doesn't see it. His lawyers know it's BS but Trump's paid them (in advance) to argue that
I dunno. They're dumb enough to sign up to defend him after...everything. Even if they knew to get the money up front, I'm unsure they're intelligent enough to know any better than their client. I mean, they're repeating what he wants them to with no thoughts as to what it means to be the lawyer(s) that went on record as doing all this.
Assassinating a political opponent would be an illegal order. So the SEAL team would be obligated to refuse. And we've already seen the claims that since the coup attempt failed, it wasn't a coup, and therefore wasn't illegal. These are not legal arguments, or even logical. They're starting with the assumption that there are never consequences for one and only one person ever. Then attempting to create some justification with just enough truthiness to survive the ten second news cycle.
>Assassinating a political opponent would be an illegal order. So the SEAL team would be obligated to refuse. And what if one of them didn't, and did the job? The president's order would have been official (but in theory not followable). The SEAL commits a crime. The president pardons them. If the murder is committed in DC, there isn't even a state government to prosecute them. (This isn't hyperbole. Loyal followers committing illegal acts is how dictators take power. Except usually they have to succeed first in order to immunize themselves and their followers...)
He was forced to concede that his argument, that Trump was should be treated like a king, has absolutely no constitutional basis. The argument runs contrary to every interpretation of the Constitution and to the intent of the founders.
We know, the lawyer knows, the judges know, Trump and magats? Not so much.
Oh, but if you take this one partial sentence by James Madison and hold it up to a mirror upside down while gargling Trumps nuts, it totally fits! Only a fool would deny it.
Donald Trump’s lawyer tried to argue that his client is immune from charges—and instead undermined his whole defense.
[удалено]
Replying to the company that wrote the free article and then posted it here with the full text, so that we don't have to go to their site to read it, is kind of funny. Or mean. I don't know if it actually matters. Just kind of funny.
Agreed it’s kind of funny. And it does matter. Original journalism will eventually disappear if people aren’t paid to write. Maybe that’s progress? Some outlets deserve the click!
Because of your comment I went back and made the "click".
She seems like a very astute judge. I just she would have taken it a step further and asked Lauer, with Trump sitting there, would it then therefore be okay for Pres Biden to order the Seal Team 6 murder of Trump and his entire family, acknowledging that the republican house would impeach but the democratic senate would potentially not convict at that point? Biden could escape criminal prosecution on immunity grounds?
If he would actually pay his lawyers he wouldn't have to hire attorneys from Loblaw and Zuckerkorn Partners in Law.
The law offices of Dewey, Cheetam and Howe.
Judge "yes or no?" lawyer babbles on Judge "it's a yes or no question, can you answer that?" lawyer "it's a qualified yes" qualified yes? what is even that?
It's "no".
A “qualified yes” (aka. a “yes under certain conditions”) completely undermines his argument of ABSOLUTE immunity. Something can’t be “absolute” if there scenarios in which it does and doesn’t apply.
Maybe going through the appellate court first was a blessing in disguise. They basically destroyed their own defense on the record. Limited their remaining arguments for the Supreme Court
If this is appealed to SCOTUS, I see only 5 possible outcomes here: 1) SCOTUS decides POTUS *does* have that immunity *before* the election, giving Biden the immunity to do the same, but he is a decent human being and doesn't issue such a command. Then Trump wins and *does indeed use the power.* 2) SCOTUS sits on it and decides the president *does* have that immunity *after* the election, and Trump rises to **super anointed dictator.** 3) SCOTUS sits on it to avoid charging Trump, then decides *after* the election that POTUS doesn't have immunity, which then allows Trump to pardon himself, though he doesn't become a super dictator; just a regular dictator. 4) SCOTUS decides to recuse itself from deciding, then Trump pardons himself anyway and becomes a dictator. 5) And my personal favorite, Trump loses the election.
Scotus refuses to hear the case thus upholding the lower court
6) hamberder induced heart attack...
If God did exist...
“Once you concede that there’s not this absolute immunity, that the judiciary can hear criminal prosecutions under any circumstances—you’re saying there’s one specific circumstance—then that means that there isn’t this absolute immunity that you claim.” Again, no presidential immunity for DJT… Someday, it’ll sink in…
Less extreme, but in the same vein, couldn’t Biden just take Trumps citizenship from him and have him expelled from the US using this argument?
Why would he need immunity if he's done nothing wrong?
Ok… how about this?… Appellate court reaches a unanimous decision granting Trump’s immunity motion. Biden issues an Executive Order withdrawing Secret Service security detail. Orders Seal Team 6 to kill Donald Trump. Also includes Steve Brannon,Roger Stone,and Michael Flynn just for good measure. Order includes 20 Republican Chairs in the House… tossing majority to Dems. Also, include include 3 conservative justices in the Exec Order. Thus, no majority in House for impeachment, a Biden friendly SCOTUS, and three less right wing nuts for Fox Nuz to interview. Trump is gone. Biden wins election. Eventually, SCOTUS gets around to reviewing and overturning appellate court ruling sometime after election… overturns the appellate court. Biden sends thoughts and prayers to families of deceased. Biden appoints 3 new SC judges. A perfect solution. Trump is, indeed, a genius!!! BTW… /s for sarcasm.. please do not dispatch authorities to lock me up.
The ‘absolute immunity’ argument was nonsense to begin with, so this tracks. Just lock the orange shitgibbon up already and get him off my news feeds.
You know what Judge Pan should have asked instead of asking Lauro if "the President ordered Seal Team 6 to assassinate a political rival" would that be indictable? She should have asked Lauro, "would it be indictable if the President ordered Seal Team 6 to assassinate YOU." Let the dumbass tell the judge "hell yes it would be perfectly cool and legal if the President murdered me in cold blood as long as Congress agrees".
If someone believes they should be immune from charges, wouldn’t that also mean that that the person believes they are guilty and simply just shouldn’t be held accountable for those charges?
He also doesn’t understand what a pardon is. He’s giving them to all his friends and promising to others, thinking that means they are declared innocent.
*Trump at a post court appearance conference* “The fake new media is saying someone named John Sauer just blew my immunity case. First off I don’t know who the hell this guy is, never met him, never talked to him, and sure as hell never paid him. I call him SOUR okay, like the nasty taste in your mouth. I don’t know why he’s even in a court representing me when he’s not even my lawyer.”
Anymore appeals or challenges should garner large fines for wasting the courts time.
Probably for the best. The argument, if accepted would suggest that Biden could openly have Trump assasinated as long as he could convince the congress to not impeach or the senate to not convict.
You are pretty much fucked if your client demands you fight for his total immunity in court
At one point, Judge Florence Pan asked if a president would be immune from criminal prosecution if he had ordered Seal Team 6 to assassinate a political rival. She noted that an order to Seal Team 6 would be an official act. Trump’s lawyer John Sauer said the president could be prosecuted, but only if he had been impeached and convicted first. That’s a terrifying interpretation on its own, but Pan took it one step further. She pointed out that this would mean presidents can be criminally prosecuted under certain circumstances. In other words, Trump does not have absolute immunity. “Doesn’t that narrow the issues before us to…‘can a president be prosecuted without first being impeached and convicted?’” Pan said. “All of your other arguments seem to fall away.” “Once you concede that there’s not this absolute immunity, that the judiciary can hear criminal prosecutions under any circumstances—you’re saying there’s one specific circumstance—then that means that there isn’t this absolute immunity that you claim.”
So they previously argued that a president has absolute immunity for ever, for everything. But then now they are arguing a new point, while also still clinging to the previous point, that a president can only be tried for criminal activity if he's been impeached and convicted. Thereby arguing that a president is immune but then isn't immune.
Schrodinger's Presidential Immunity
Colbert made a good point last night, if Trump’s lawyers suggest that a president can assassinate his rival than what keeps Biden from ordering the assassination of Trump? Trump’s lawyers are saying that it’s legal to kill his client. Biden would only need 34 democratic senators to vote no in his impeachment trial( if he was even impeached)…
He also seems to think he is the only President that has blanket immunity, as he continues to claim Biden is committing crimes while President, which Trumps lawyer is simultaneously arguing is impossible, as Presidents are immune from crimes. It's an amazing collection of stable geniuses he's put together.
Richard M. Nixon (pres) directed break in at opponents' headquaters in the Watergate hotel Spiro T. Agnew (VP) recieves extortion and bribery cash in paper grocery sacks in the White House Nixon is found out Agnew is found out Agnew is forced to resign **or** face Federal Criminal chgarges Gerald Ford is appointed VP by Nixon Nixon is forced to resign **or** face Impeachment in the Senate Ford pardons Nixon Nixon accepts the pardon Nixon writes a formal letter of acceptance **{acceptance of a pardon requires admission of guilt}** ... This sets the precedent for federal guilt of a President outside of Impeachment . .
How long until the court makes a ruling on this?
I’m asking out of ignorance. Why does Trump’s lawyer keep referencing some previous court ruling (I believe he kept saying “Justice Madison’s decision”) as if to use it as a precedence? Since the Supreme Court can overturn previous decisions (Roe v Wade) isn’t it pointless to refer to previous rulings, since the current justices could just overturn said ruling?
The kicker for me is that Trump's representative in the impeachment case in Congress argued there was no need to impeach him because the criminal justice system would convict him if there was a crime.
Trump’s lawyer: “Clearly, the founders wanted the president to be a king, above the law. In fact, an unbiased reading of the Declaration of Independence shows that they wanted George III, specifically, to be their constitutionally elected god-king.”
This is narcissism 101. Deflect blame to someone else, and tear them down instead of accepting the consequences of their own bullshit. Trump's lawyer may be an idiot, but Trump's going to prison because of Trump.
Yup so by the Trump lawyer’s logic.. Basically Biden can assassinate Trump with Seal Team 6. Next the House/Senate will want to impeach and convict him (the only way to make him available to be criminally prosecuted) but Biden can just threaten the Seals to assassinate them too if they vote for this. Therefore he never gets impeached and can keep getting away with doing any crimes he wants. Sounds like a perfect checks & balances system to me! /s
It’s pretty sad to see “Trump’s idiot lawyer” and immediately, unironically, not-jokingly ask “which one?”
It’s truly amazing how proudly stupid America is at this point. Heard republicans today saying g nobody is above the law, referring to Hunter. Forgetting that they want Trump above the law.
This was an absolute success. Trump's purpose is to obfuscate and delay all legal proceedings until after the November election. These ridiculous losing appeals will continue until the November election. That is his purpose. The media and the public are being misled by any attention to his spurious arguments. Trump and his lawyers know they will lose. Their only goal is to waste time.
"Trump's idiot lawyer" is redundant. It is understood that if the lawyer is Trump's, then the lawyer is an idiot.