Trump lawyers are arguing that if Biden ordered Trump to be assassinated, Biden would be immune unless he is impeached and removed from office

HipKat

HipKat

Administrator
Staff member

Former President Donald Trump is in Washington, DC, for a US Circuit Court of Appeals hearing after a lower-court ruling rejected his claims of immunity in special counsel Jack Smith's 2020 election subversion case. Trump is seeking to have the federal charges against him dismissed.

A very interesting exchange occurred in this immunity trial that is taking place. A judge asked Trump's lawyer that if Trump order a SEAL Team to assassinate his political rival, would Trump be immune due to it being an official act. This appears to be the position of Trump. Biden can order his assassination (since Biden is the president) and Biden would be immune.

Trump's attorneys effectively said that Biden would be immune (again, Biden is the president and they are arguing that the president would be immune). The attorney qualified his answer by saying that the president could be held accountable once the president was impeached and removed from office.

So to be clear, the position of Trump and his attorneys is that Biden can order a military unit under his command to assassinate him and as long as the senate refused to convict Biden in an impeachment, Biden would be immune. The attorney specifically says that Biden loses immunity IF he is impeached and removed.

Truly mind boggling the level of stupid that we see from this guy. But I guess this is what Trump probably wants. A country where the president can order the assassination of his or her rivals and as long as they aren't impeached they will remain immune.

I disagree, obviously. I believe that if a president gave such an order and a military unit or individual under his command did not recognize that the order is illegal and actually carried it out, the president is guilty as fuck with or without an impeachment. There should be no immunity for something like that in a nation where the rule of law exists and actually matters.

Hell, just giving the order should enough to prosecute the president. Even if the 21 year old Marine sniper who got the order was smart enough to know its an illegal order and refused to follow it, it still should be enough to prosecute the president.
 
This is why I don't think you are going to like the SCOTUS ruling. Trump was charged but never convicted, refer to my rapist released on a technicality post. I want to he wrong but only time will tell
 
The argument about assassination is laughable.

I disagree I conviction is required.

I do agree that some technical issue will be used by SCOTUS but it will not be Presidential Immunity.
 
SpikedLemonade said:
The argument about assassination is laughable.

I disagree I conviction is required.

I do agree that some technical issue will be used by SCOTUS but it will not be Presidential Immunity.
Click to expand...
Conviction not being required also sets very dangerous precedents. In a time of war on American soil (and I don't mean the war of terror) or in the case of active insurrection such as the war of southern aggression (fuck that northern aggression shit, the south started that war, not Lincoln, Grant, and Sherman's fault that at the moment of truth Lee was such a little bitch), what Trump did would be enough to bar him from running for office. I think that was the spirit of the 14th Amendment.

You have to understand what the civil war amendments were about. The Radical Republicans, when Republicans being radical was actually an awesomely badass and amazingly wonderful thing for the country, knew that their vision for America way well start a second civil war. So they used the machines of compromise to steer it through. For instance, the 13th Amendment abolished slavery. However, it also kept slavery for punishment for crimes (frankly there needs to be an amendment to remove this clause because so much of the barbaric prison industrial complex is based off of this). The 14th amendment was written somewhat later, federal occupation of the south was an accomplished fact and they gave citizenship to former slaves. Knowing full well that this could cause a second civil war they ensured that those who would lead insurrection would never be allowed to seek office. Oh, and they were also reacting to what must have been seen as a load of unacceptable bullshit in the wake of Lincoln's martyrdom. Sure, Lincoln wanted to put the madness behind us and who knows with him to steer reconstruction we may have been far ahead in terms of civil rights, and his second innaugural address seemed to suggest a much gentler reconstruction. Then he got shot so picture it, its 1865 and 1866 and guess who is back in Washington. When Lincoln is lying in Springfield, Illinois with his poor wife completely shattered emotionally, the same asshats who started the war of southern aggression are back in their senate and congressional seats. The Radical Republicans knew they would do everything possible to derail abolishing or rolling back the abolition of slavery, the giving of citizenship to all Americans, and the right to vote of all American males above 21, so they placed troops in the south and put language in the 14th amendment to prevent those who started the war of southern aggression from ever being able to hold elected or appointed office.


At the time of the civil war and the immediate aftermath, remember some useless southern shitbag had just assassinated the president, this language was meant to prevent a traitor from ever holding elected office so that those who started the war of southern aggression would never be able achieve their aims. However, 160 years on, those for whom the language of that clause was intended are all long dead. Preventing Trump from running for office when he was not convicted by the senate or by the courts establishes its own set of very dangerous precedents.
 
If they want to rule in favor of conviction being required, then law will need to be rewritten or amended, because as it stands, it says, taking part in Insurrectionist or rebellion, are offering comfort and Kade to those who take part in insurrection or rebellion

If Donald Trump does not meet the first part of that, he certainly meets the second part.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top