Trump’s lawyers argued that he can commit any crimes he wants – and he can’t be touched!

I’m not joking. That was really their argument. No matter what crimes he commits. That means if he commits crimes where the statute of limitations is shorter than his term of office, he is literally above the law!

The judges were aghast.

If, for example, he did pull out a handgun and shoot someone on Fifth Avenue. I’m talking about while in office. Nothing could be done? That’s your position?” Judge Denny Chin asked.

“That is correct,” Consovoy said.

18 thoughts on “Trump’s lawyers argued that he can commit any crimes he wants – and he can’t be touched!

  1. Following this logic, if he can do it on 5th Avenue, he can do it anywhere. And if he kills one, then he can kill any number. Scenario 1: Trump with an AR-15 walks out on the street. Cops recognize him, know he’s the prez. He proceeds to kill a child but the cops and Secret Service can do nothing so he kills a few more (all minorities) till he has his fill and stops for a burger.
    Scenario 2: Trump takes his AR-15 to joint session of Congress. He takes out Pelosi, Ocasio-Cortez, Schiff and a few more Dems, then Romney because why the hell not. No law enforcement officer can intervene. He then addresses the survivors and proclaims he’s a stable genius.
    In both scenarios, he pardons himself on his last day in office.

    1. The pardon power only extends to Federal Crimes. Looks like there might be some State Crimes in your scenario…but as long as he kills people only in DC….

      1. No, committing your crimes solely in DC doesn’t help. President Grant has already set that precedent. He was arrested by the DC government for a crime he committed as President, a traffic offense, and was convicted and punished while still President.

        1. No, the question is whether he could have pardoned himself for that offense….never mind that he didn’t.

          1. He need not pardon himself, so there is no need for a constitutional crisis or any judicial review of the Constitution on that debatable point..

            He can step down temporarily via the 25th, section 3. Mike Pence, as acting President, can pardon Trump. Trump can then declare he is fit, and resume office fully pardoned of all crimes.

            That sucks, of course, but it is completely constitutional.

  2. As someone with a decidedly liberal bent who thinks Trump is destined for a place of honor in the bottom 5 presidents in all of US history: I think he’s right. I think the head of the executive enjoys functional immunity from the criminal justice system, and while crimes can be investigated, I don’t think he can be charged.

    The only remedy for a wayward President is impeachment and removal – at which point criminal charges can be brought, barring a paron.

    1. So the Revolutionary War was fought for nothing. Because the King also had immunity while he was king…might as well have kept him then. I doubt the founders would agree.

  3. West Pointer Taylor was with the Screaming Eagles in Nam. Trump and his screaming bonespurs were fighting their own Viet Nam at Studio 54.
    Now which one of those two am I going to believe?

  4. Totally irrelevant as he has not broken any laws.

    Why is the media wasting anyone’s time with this?

    Look into and report on actual news please

      1. Tanner thank you for your opinion but you have no idea of what my level of education on the subject matter is…

        First off we have no idea what context from which the comment about immunity was made, you have to understand how these questions are asked and spun to feed the news cycle and make others look as poorly as possible. This occurs on both sides of the isle and the fact that it is overplayed and all to often misreported is what I’m referring to as wasting peoples time.

        Second off the comment made is stupid and most likely inaccurate on the ability to prosecute a sitting president but its beside the point and not one that myself or most likely anyone else can truly share or debate here and actually provide legal analysis that is worthy of any of our time.

        Lastly I have no idea of who you are, what your education level is but I’m sure you are better than this. Simply insulting someone because you disagree with their opinion is not ok and is exactly the purpose of this article.

        I am not a Trump robot but I do love that for the first time in a very long time we have a president that has actually done what they based their campaign on.

    1. Just because the media covers it, and you want to create your own fact free reality, doesn’t make it true. Read the scanned PDF of the testimony Monday. It’s 15 pages, so it will probably be the most reading you’ve done in your life, but it creates a clear trail of what Trump did that was illegal.

      Credible witness testimony is a PART of law. The way the Trump cultists bend their minds that they don’t anywhere else in life, to fit this created reality is disturbing.

      If a neighbor with a prior record broke into your house that lived, two houses away, and stole everything you had, with at least two or three other neighbors as witnesses – do you think you would be fine with him not being arrested because he said he didn’t do it when asked and there’s no real proof because it wasn’t on video?

      That’s your defense of this. The US ambassador to Ukraine Bill Taylor heard directly from the US ambassador from the EU that Trump specifically held the aid up to investigate Biden, and go in front of the public to declare so. The initial whistleblower complaint was corroborated by another individual with direct knowledge. Even his Chief of Staff CONFIRMED it as how the operation works.

      He broke the law, under any sort of reasonable doubt. You Trump cultists are about the biggest hypocrites in the world. The way you twist your mind to fit a reality that doesn’t exist just for this man is pathetic. You wouldn’t apply this same standard to someone who committed a crime against you, but you distort whatever you need to do, for some insane reason, to support some man who could give a shit less about you. What the fuck is wrong with you people?

    2. I’m ashamed to be from the same part of the country as you. And you sound more to be a reactionary Trumpist than a real conservative. There are very few of those left in the Trump Party.

      1. Bill I’m truly sorry you feel that way.

        I am a conservative and with such I want smaller government lower taxes and fair and open trade.

        I refuse to watch mainstream media Fox included as there is little fair or honest reporting anymore. This article is most likely garbage and grabbing some portion of a stupid comment made and turning it into more garbage to fill the news cycle.

        I am really not a fan of many in DC, to some extent Trump included. I dont need to listen to him beat his chest over what he has done but, he has done a lot to help secure our country and borders like every politician in recent history has prior to election until trump took office, taken us thru a painful trade war with China but yet expose the imbalance that previous administrations have left us with and kickstart the economy to bring us back into relevance and yet again becoming more than just the world’s largest consumer.

        I don’t care if he feels he is teflon coated when it comes to hypothetical crimes, I want to see these imbalances corrected so that we hopefully become a sustainable society once more and if he is the one to take us there so be it.

        Please refrain from insults and place some thought behind your comments instead of only insulting with the belief that it discredits the previous comment(s) made…

        1. I usually do put some thought in my comments and sometimes more than a little research. But that one was a bit hasty. You do sound more like a conservative than a Trumpite and you are definitely polite enough to be from the Midwest. However it being early a.m., will have to continue this later. But I will say that when a President and his lawyers are maintaining that he is above the law, that is a topic for the media if there ever was one. That was what touched me off.

  5. I am not going to offer any opinion on whether Trump’s lawyers are correct on the law. I think they are on stronger ground when it comes to federal prosecution, but I have no idea what the law says in terms of state prosecution. But if Trump did shoot someone on 5th Avenue and his lawyers raised this defense against prosecution, I don’t believe he could just wait out the statute of limitations. Generally, statutes of limitations are “tolled” (e.g. the clock stops) under such circumstances. For instance, in many jurisdictions statutes of limitations are tolled for minors who are victims of abuse until they are 21 if they decide they want to sue their abuser. That is a civil example, but the principle should be the same for a criminal case. One thing that is clear is that the individual Trump shot (if they survived or their estate if they did not) could file a civil suit against Trump and that suit could proceed (at least through discovery) with Trump in office. That was the unanimous decision of the Supreme Court in Jones v. Clinton. Interestingly enough, in terms of politically troubling defenses offered by a president’s personal attorneys, Bill Clinton argued that Paula Jones civil suit should be tolled while he was in office because as Commander and Chief he qualified as a deployed member of the U.S. military. I recall him being criticized over that.

  6. And by that logic anything he does to extend that time in office can’t be dealt with as long as he is in office. Sweet concept if you’re the Orange Buffoon.

Comments are closed.