Pressed in court, Trumpās lawyers made an argument that would destroy nearly all limitations on presidential power.
ā¦
In a hearing before the D.C. Circuit Court, the former presidentās lawyers argued that he should be immune from criminal prosecution for his role in the attempt to steal the 2020 presidential election. This argument has an obvious flaw: It implies that the president is above the law. Such a blunt rejection of the Constitution and the basic concept of American democracy is too much even for Trump to assertāpublicly, at leastāso his lawyers have proposed a theory. They say that he canāt be criminally prosecuted unless he is first impeached and convicted by Congress.
This argument is no less dangerous, as a hypothetical asked in court demonstrated in chilling terms. Judge Florence Pan asked Trumpās attorney, D. John Sauer, if āa president who ordered SEAL Team 6 to assassinate a political rivalā could be criminally prosecuted. Sauer tried to hem and haw his way through an answer but ultimately stated that such a president couldnāt be prosecuted unless he was first impeached, convicted, and removed by Congress.
āBut if he werenāt, there would be no criminal prosecution, no criminal liability for that?ā Pan pressed. Sauer had no choice but to agree, because acknowledging any exceptions would have blown a hole in his argument.
ā¦
What lawyers say in court is not the same as what politicians say or will do in office, but no normal politician would allow such an argument to be made on his behalf, especially while sitting in the courtroom. Trump did because his mentality is victory at all costsāwinning the present legal case, but also anything else. Trump has already made clear that he wishes to punish his political opponents, and once he discovers the possibility of some power, he is seldom able to resist trying it. Todayās legal argument could very well be next yearās exercise of presidential power.
yep, and this is one of the arguments that bothers me the most. Iāve had numerous discussions with republicans that go something along the lines of āwell both sides do itā or āitās only because a republican did itā and that drives me up a wall. Itās like i donāt hate political assholes that do stupid stuff because theyāre republican. I just hate political assholes who do stupid stuffā¦ democrat or republican i donāt care. If thereās proof that they did stupid illegal crap, they should all be punished. i donāt get why this is difficult to grasp lol.
Right. For example, the Epstein fight logs show Bill Clinton and Donald Trump on the plane. If thereās evidence that either one did illegal stuff, I say imprison both of them. (Iād call the flight logs suspicious activity enough to open an investigation, but by itself not enough proof to result in a criminal conviction.)
Did I like Bill Clinton as a politician? In general, yes. There was plenty of stuff that I didnāt like about him, but I voted for him for his second term. (I was too young for his first term, but would have voted for him if I was older.) Still, my general feeling that he was a decent President doesnāt mean I think he should get away with criminal activities.
Yet, there are so many Republicans that literally donāt care what Trump has done. A video could come out definitively proving that Trump had sex with underage girls and even if his supporters accepted it as true, theyād still support him. The modern Republican party is a cult and itās scary.