631
Trump Attorney Tells Judges Presidential Immunity Would Even Cover Assassinating Rivals, Selling Pardons (themessenger.com)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/nottheonion@lemmy.world
90 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

U.S. presidents cannot be prosecuted for selling pardons or assassinating political rivals through SEAL Team Six, personal Trump lawyer John Sauer argued Tuesday.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 50 points 2 years ago (3 children)

U.S. presidents cannot be prosecuted for selling pardons or assassinating political rivals through SEAL Team Six

If that's true, we should do something about it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 42 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    "Unless they’re impeached and convicted by the Senate."

    Bc they know even Dems would convict Joe for murder but they would never do it to one of their own.

    GOP is going to coup the shit out of us in the near future.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    the point they’re trying to make here is that, because Trump was acquitted by the Senate, this prosecution would amount to double jeopardy.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    They made that case because he wasn’t convicted. As a lawyer, you play as many cards as you have. They know it's bs, we know it, and the judges know it too.

    I’m saying that if the argument worked, hypothetically, they would use it as bitch cudgel and a shield.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 14 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    If I recall correctly, this would be an illegal order in violation of the Title 10 authorities which govern DoD activities if it took place within the borders of the country. I'm not a federal lawyer so I don't know the details, but I believe it prohibits the armed forces operating under Title 10 from performing operations on U.S. soil. Title 18 however governs agencies like the FBI and allows operations within U.S. borders but prohibits foreign operations.

    This is all a vague memory from an old lesson, but at first glance the attorney's argument is utter crap. It boils down to "no act of the president can be considered in violation of any law." Not a comforting sentiment, and a dangerous precedent.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •