Donald Trump’s lawyer tried to argue that his client is immune from charges—and instead undermined his whole defense.
the lawyer might as well do a lousy job since Trump won’t pay him anyway
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.
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.
If he would actually pay his lawyers he wouldn’t have to hire attorneys from Loblaw and Zuckerkorn Partners in Law.
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.
Yes he just blew up his own argument that was shitty and doomed to fail from the get go.
Anymore appeals or challenges should garner large fines for wasting the courts time.
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.
> Trump’s ldiot Lawyer
Do you have the slightest idea how little that narrows it down?
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?
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
How long until the court makes a ruling on this?
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.
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.
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?!
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.
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.
You are pretty much fucked if your client demands you to fight for his total immunity in court
*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.”
“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?
It was fun to listen to.
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 ‘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.
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.
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?
27 comments
Donald Trump’s lawyer tried to argue that his client is immune from charges—and instead undermined his whole defense.
the lawyer might as well do a lousy job since Trump won’t pay him anyway
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.
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.
If he would actually pay his lawyers he wouldn’t have to hire attorneys from Loblaw and Zuckerkorn Partners in Law.
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.
Yes he just blew up his own argument that was shitty and doomed to fail from the get go.
Anymore appeals or challenges should garner large fines for wasting the courts time.
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.
> Trump’s ldiot Lawyer
Do you have the slightest idea how little that narrows it down?
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?
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
How long until the court makes a ruling on this?
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.
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.
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?!
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.
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.
You are pretty much fucked if your client demands you to fight for his total immunity in court
*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.”
“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?
It was fun to listen to.
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 ‘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.
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.
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?