US presidents cannot be prosecuted for selling pardons or assassinating political rivals through SEAL Team Six, personal Trump lawyer John Sauer argued Tuesday
Advancing a sweeping interpretation of executive immunity, Donald Trump’s attorney told a federal appeals court on Tuesday that U.S. presidents could not be prosecuted for selling pardons or assassinating political rivals through SEAL Team Six.
Trump’s lead attorney D. John Sauer argued that only a president who has been impeached and removed from office in a Senate trial potentially would be subject to prosecution for those kinds of alleged crimes.
A three-judge panel appeared extremely skeptical of Trump’s vision of absolute immunity, sharply questioning and interrupting Sauer during the opening minutes of the oral arguments with the former president himself sitting nearby.
“Could a president order SEAL Team Six to assassinate a political rival? That’s an official act–an order to Seal Team Six,” U.S. Circuit Judge Florence Pan asked Sauer.
“He would have to be, and would speedily be, you know, impeached and convicted before the criminal prosecution,” Sauer replied, setting a pre-condition for such prosecution in Pan’s hypothetical.
So this means its open Trump hunting season for Biden, right? It is totally legal and cool for him to assassinate Trump, right??
Of course we all know they intend for this argument to only apply to Trump.
Stuff like this is what I wish would happen.
Like the german nazi party desperately wants more people to be evicted from Germany, I say great, evict the AfD politicians and their voters! Wooot! Everyone happy!
Right, when the right wing fuckos trot out their obviously bad-faith arguments, we should be taking to them to their logical fucking conclusions right the fuck away.
It would be beautiful to see the entire Republican wing of the house pissing themselves and losing their shit knowing that an assassin from Biden could get them at any moment. Especially after the first few drop and Biden just says “it’s me, it’s totally legal and cool, right?” Also making sure to drop the first 20-or-so at the same time so right after it happens the Dems have a majority in both the House and Senate so no Republican can actually bring a vote for impeachment.
They’d be screaming bloody murder because the only thing they actually care about is their own skins.
Nah, let them keep a majority in the house. They vote to impeach, the Senate acquits, then he goes for round two…
Trump is not a very good walker. Very weak steps. Maybe it will be a sort of accident? Is that the ruzzian way or what?
Very weak steps by the very low window in the very tall building.
Trump has the tallesest buildings. Buildings with windows so tall, the likes of which nobody has ever seen before.
Nah, that’s polonium tea
I know Elmer always lost, but I still want to see Trump being chased by Biden with a rifle like Elmer Fudd. Real life doesn’t have to imitate the cartoon.
No. If you read the article, you’ll see that this isn’t Sauer’s argument. It’s another ragebait title, and based on the comments in this thread, it’s working.
EDIT: Okay, I see the flaw in my thinking. Carry on.
His argument is that there would be no possible legal recourse if a US president tried to seize absolute power the way Saddam Hussein did in Iraq, by having everyone in the legislature that might oppose him lined up and shot.
Okay, I was wrong. I see the problem. Thank you.
Yeah it is. Maybe you’d like to think there’s some subtlety we’re missing because Sauer stated the President would need to be impeached to lose immunity, but what happens if the President assassinates anyone who would impeach him?
Oh right on, hey call it off guys and gals. This dude read the article and says democracy is going to be just fine.Edit: much respect to anyone willing to update their conclusions based on new input.
Here’s a better question, Judge Pan.
Could a president order Seal Team Six to assassinate unsympathetic judges, either of an appeals court or the Supreme Court itself, since that’s an “official act?” Because that might be something worth considering.
This argument would, in fact, suggest that the president could order a judge assassinated. And I’m guessing the appeals court knows that.
Like every other grand ol’ projection, I believe this should be interpreted as a threat of things to come, not academic speculation.
what the fuck
The fascists saying the fascist shit out loud
Yes, and also revealing how fascist the United States has been for centuries.
The US really needs to sit down and decide what the president can and cannot do. It won’t be the last time magats try this shit.
Boomers don’t think it’s important so it won’t happen.
Whatever 33 senators will allow and not vote to convict on an impeachment vote. Under Biden, that is what Debbie Stabenow (33rd most liberal senator) and senators more liberal will allow. Under Trump, that would be what J.D. Vance (33rd most conservative) and more conservative senators would allow.
Completely fucking insane…
Pan reframed the question to include a hypothetical where a president ordered assassination and then was not impeached, and Sauer still hung on to “impeachment has to happen first.”
So Biden hunting down the entire GOP House for sport is up for grabs, then. It’s not a coup, it’s part of his official duties!
This is exactly one of the scenarios that Jack Smith offered as an example of why this kind of immunity is ridiculous.
I’ll just say that I have more hope and faith in Jack Smith than I was ever able to muster for fucking Robert Mueller, who had his own shady history with the railroading of Bruce Ivins over the Anthrax scare in the Bush era.
To my knowledge, despite the mountains of evidence to prove that Ivins was not “their man” the FBI continues to hold that they were correct.
Smith has proven himself to be a more serious contender than Mueller.
An individual allowed to do anything without consequence is a dictator, not a president.
And so after years upon years upon decades of rhetoric from Republicans warning about the growing power of the Executive and the abuses of the Executive by FDR…
… uh, nevermind all that apparently, if our guy is in charge he should be able to just unilaterally assasinate political rivals.
You know. Like anyone that would vote to impeach him. For assassinating political rivals.
This is literal baby brain logic that actual Elementary School Children could probably understand is stupid.
Hooray for living in Clown World, the dumbest possible timeline.
This is basically logic that can only possibly have come from serious QTard Syndrome, Terminal Stage. Its the only way possible for /the Storm/ to actually happen.
Which is why it’s a batshit insane idea.
Remember, his base sees this as strength.
They don’t care about the means, they want a “strongman” to kill the Americans they see as their enemies for them.
Modern Republicans don’t give a two shilling shit about democracy, they’d rather have an authoritarian so long as it’s an authoritarian they’re deluded into believing represents their interests.
Just in case anyone thinks these remarks might make him lose a single vote.
i.e. a preview of the next administration.
I agree, and at the same time I wonder what the current president could fix the issue with the former? I mean, the current president has immunity right? /s
Trump is literally scraping the bottom of the barrel when it comes to attorneys
Ugh, Trump dug through (metiphorically, guy couldnt actually dig) the bottom of that barrel and is now into the earths mantle
Can you imagine the payoff though if the court agrees and he becomes president? Assassinate your enemies, straight out of Putin’s playbook. That’s a dictator’s favorite move! Democrats and liberals wouldn’t do it because they have fucking morals, but the GOP would be happy to.
Trump’s lead attorney D. John Sauer argued that only a president who has been impeached and removed from office in a Senate trial potentially would be subject to prosecution for those kinds of alleged crimesAnd it gets better. In the Georgia case, they are arguing that Trump can’t be tried because he was impeached for that crime and a criminal trial would be double jeopardy.
Ignore for a second that his impeachment wasn’t over the Georgia crimes. Trump’s lawyers are arguing that you need to impeach/convict before you can criminally charge, but if you impeach then you can’t criminally charge.
Their legal theories are the equivalent of “I object! It’s devastating to my case!”
Which law is that written in again?
