Trump team argues assassination of rivals is covered by presidential immunity
Trump team argues assassination of rivals is covered by presidential immunity
Former President Trump’s legal team suggested Tuesday that even a president directing SEAL Team Six to kill a political opponent would be an action barred from prosecution given a former executive&…
Former President Trump’s legal team suggested Tuesday that even a president directing SEAL Team Six to kill a political opponent would be an action barred from prosecution given a former executive’s broad immunity to criminal prosecution.
The hypothetical was presented to Trump attorney John Sauer who answered with a “qualified yes” that a former president would be immune from prosecution on that matter or even on selling pardons.
Sauer later argued the threat of prosecution could have a chilling effect on future presidents’ decisions, saying they would need to look over their shoulder and ask, “Am I going to jail for this?” when making controversial decisions.
That's exactly the fucking point, you chode! The president should be weighing that consequence.
Reminds me of this:
My suggestion was quite simple: Put that needed code number [to launch a nuclear weapon] in a little capsule, and then implant that capsule right next to the heart of a volunteer. The volunteer would carry with him a big, heavy butcher knife as he accompanied the President. If ever the President wanted to fire nuclear weapons, the only way he could do so would be for him first, with his own hands, to kill one human being. The President says, "George, I'm sorry but tens of millions must die." He has to look at someone and realize what death is—what an innocent death is. Blood on the White House carpet. It's reality brought home.
When I suggested this to friends in the Pentagon they said, "My God, that's terrible. Having to kill someone would distort the President's judgment. He might never push the button."
— Roger Fisher, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, March 1981
They literally don't know the difference between presidents and kings
To be fair, the supreme court has made the same argument when granting themselves absolute immunity. But it was just as stupid then (and still theoretically only applies when executing their job).
"We could never do anything if we had to worry about lawsuits all the time" yes, that's how life works for everyone who makes decisions.
I saw that line, buried at the end of the article, and shouted at the screen, "Yeah, you fuckin' should!" I want to live in the world where the president is terrified of the consequences of his or her actions.
I want to live in a world where every cop, lawyer and CEO also lives with that same fear.
I don't know, that's a pretty subtle point, man. You think the average person can understand that? I mean, obviously even the former president can't, and some call him the greatest president almost as much as he calls it himself.
They are making this argument, knowing the logical consequences. They are also counting on Biden being an actual human being instead of the steaming pile their client is.
They are also praying to their god that the Appellate Court has no knowledge of the "color of office" argument. Assassinations of US citizens is most definitely beyond the scope of presidential duties, and to accept otherwise is to accept that the president is a king.
I often wonder if Trump's counsel is undermining him on purpose, or just going with the hand they were played.
They're trying to delay the trials until after the election hoping he will win and just pardon himself.
And honestly, it's not the Jan 6th Trial they're really worried about - it's the documents case. They have so, so much evidence that he knowingly, intentionally lied about having documents and tried hiding them from the government. There's absolutely no deniability there.
If he loses in November he's toast, and they all know it.
Might as well get the guillotines ready anyway.
Okay, Joe. You know what to do.
Biden: If the Supreme Court agrees, take the shot.
He's known for a long time. But corporate Democrats only play hardball against progressives.
This is a fucking wild comment. I couldn't have imagined this being the discourse we have as politically acceptable on either side. We are low-key driving off the cliff and going into civil war territory and I'm seeing it everywhere.
Ask him if that means Biden can assassinate Trump. Then remind him of the concept of estoppel. Then Biden comes to their first presidential debate and places a .44 Magnum handgun on the podium, to see if Trump runs away like the little bitch he is.
“If Biden weren’t so weak, he’d assassinate me” is what he’s saying.
A .44 is excessive; Biden might not be strong enough to fire it safely.
A .357 would do.
Fuck that. Point a .44 at him and say, "go ahead, make my day," like Dirty Harry.
Jesus Christ, do you want to see Trump splattered? We all know a 9mm will blow the lungs out, that should be plenty. That or a trusty shotgun, obviously, which we all know sends bad guys running just by loading the thing.
That doesn't quite work.
Trump's lawyers argument is that presidents are immune from criminal prosecution on any official act, even if that official act is illegal or unconstitutional; that the only remedy is impeachment.
The judge brought up ordering seal team 6 to assinate a rival as an example of an obviously illegal official act. Trump's lawyers response was "obviously he'd be impeached, but yeah, I guess if he weren't he'd be immune from prosecution".
Shooting Trump at the debate would be a prosecutable private action, according to Trump's lawyer. What Biden would have to do is to tell seal team 6 "If Trump gets on this stage, shoot him".
Every alarm is going off, people. They are telling everyone exactly what they intend to do.
Project 2025. https://www.project2025.org/ and there is a lot more.
Fuck this Nazi and wannabe hitler 2.0
Wow what a website. I love how much they talk about the 180 day playbook but give absolutely zero mention to anything that is in it. I wonder why...
People just think Trump is a jokester.
I think it's the dangerous side-effect of him being such a fake reality TV personality. He can say over the top insane things and people are already trained to not take him too seriously.
It's part of the propaganda. Just look at all the right wing nuts around the world. They all follow the same guidbook
Sadly, conservatives are either too stupid to even understand, or it’s EXACTLY what they want.
There is no in between.
They're thinking the leopards won't be eating their faces.
I have nothing else to say to this man. This is one of those times where all the people outright calling him a Nazi were 100% correct.
Now I'm worried that he's gonna turn the Navy SEALs into the modern day Gestapo.
The SEALs won't put up with that shit. They have the same ability to tell their CO, "nope, that's an unlawful order," that the Nukes do. Difference is that the CO isn't gonna try to force the SEAL to do shit.
You only need a small fraction to agree.
There is a reason why the GOP has obstructed the top generals from nominations.
They need only one on the top. Anymore is a bonus.
The SEALs won’t put up with that shit.
The SEALs will line up single file while backslapping and ho-raying, then get into the helicopter that crashes six miles outside of the drop zone. They're a bunch of juiced up twenty-year-olds with silver stars in their eyes. They'll fall over themselves for the opportunity to do something recklessly stupid.
Difference is that the CO isn’t gonna try to force the SEAL to do shit.
How many Michael Flynns do you think are bouncing around the US military? More than enough to find someone willing to bite.
I was worried the same way about Blackwater / Academi last time around.
A week ago, we were half jokingly saying that if their arguments were valid, Biden could straight up shoot Trump at the first debate, say "Presidential Immunity, fucker", and walk off the stage. The judge then asks a Trump lawyer about a similar hypothetical, and the idiot actually says yeah, that's fine.
Because he's calling their bluff. Go ahead, feel free to take the shot. We all know Biden doesn't have that set on him. The Dems lack the Allen Dulles energy that'll put two in the head of the opposition's front runner from the sixth floor of Dealey Plaza.
If Biden was the kind of guy who would walk onto the debate stage with a shootgun that had "Executive Immunity" etched into it, maybe he wouldn't. But that's more of a Ted Cruz / Lauren Boebert move. Biden will do a TikTok where he calls Trump a hypocrite, right before his DOJ drops another ten indictments nobody thinks will ever see the inside of a courtroom.
A bold claim for the obnoxious rival of the president, but okay bet.
Right. This is seriously the only thing I thought of.
Like you are arguing it's ok for the sitting president to murder his opponent.
You are not the sitting president. You are the current opponent.
Seems like a fucking weird taunt.
Hehehehehehehehehehe
But somehow charging trump is election interference 🙄
He argues so much strength from a position of exceptional weakness. Well done
This is literally a Satan v. Goliath story
He'll go on record saying it was "just a joke" and all his smug braindead followers will claim his sense of humor is too refined for us to understand properly. This really is the timeline where Biff Tannen won...
And then about 4 days later, he /will be assassinated/, and then all the chuds will switch to 'We were joking about joking about it, moron!', just as we have watched essentially the vast majority of chuds essentially joke about Nazis so hard, for so long, that they simply became them.
I hate this idiots, for one they have no concept of humor or what being funny entails, for two, uh, they are Nazis.
My god, I hope nobody actually tries it. The worst part is that it's lose/lose. Fail, and Trump will ride the "someone tried to kill meeeee" train all the way back to the WH. Succeed, and congratulations, you've handed a cult the martyr they needed.
I don't know that you can say that a legal argument is just a joke. Although he just says random shit and half of it makes no sense, so who knows?
I mean, it's not something he himself said, so they don't even really need to do that.
Basically, what happened was his lawyer was arguing that the only remedy for official actions taken by a president is impeachment; they can't be prosecuted in court aside from that.
The judge said "a president ordering seal team 6 to assassinate a rival is an official act, yes?" Trump's lawyer said "He'd quickly be impeached for that!", then when pressed more, something about Marbury v Madson presupposing something or other, then finally when pressed for a yes or no as to whether he'd be immune from prosecution, said "qualified yes".
The whole exchange is pretty bad and worth a listen.
Please be the onion
The first thing I thought was, welp let's just kill this pos and see if it's true that the King(since we are heading that way) is immune from prosecution.
Why stop there? Get rid of all the opposition and get yourself a whole new set of SCOTUS judges while you're at it.
Perhaps a few billionaires as well to water the tree of liberty?
The scary part of all these kinds of arguments are that if they were somehow successful and got a court to uphold this as valid/law, imagine the next sweet talking purely evil piece of shit having power cart blanch, anything goes. These "religious" assholes alone could probably think of stuff that would make Hitler blush.
Yeah. There's a reason most of the world rebelled and moved away from monarchies and other totalitarian governments.
I mean...bet.
Remember when the maga clowns' favourite insult for Obama was "King Obama" because of some perceived presidential overreach issues? If they had any moral integrity, pointing out these double standards would make them think.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
The hypothetical was presented to Trump attorney John Sauer who answered with a “qualified yes” that a former president would be immune from prosecution on that matter or even on selling pardons.
In the hearing that reviewed a motion from Trump’s team to toss his election interference charges, Sauer argued that presidents can only be criminally prosecuted if they have already been tried and convicted by the Senate.
Former President Donald Trump speaks to the media at a Washington hotel, Tuesday, Jan. 9, 2024, after attending a hearing before the D.C.
Judge Michelle Childs, a Biden appointee, noted that a president could resign rather than face impeachment, something that under the framework of Trump’s attorneys would allow them to dodge future prosecution.
James Pearce, a lawyer with Smith’s office, forcefully pushed back against the notion that mechanisms to hold presidents accountable for criminal actions should be weakened.
“What kind of world are we living in … if a president orders his SEAL team to murder a political rival and then resigns or is not impeached — that is not a crime?
The original article contains 410 words, the summary contains 181 words. Saved 56%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
sweet deal, where can I get this insurance?
I’m sure they’ll argue it’s in the constitution
So do the secret service for Biden have to follow up on this? This idiot confuses me.
