Connect with us

News

Justices Slam Trump Lawyer: ‘Why Is It the President Would Not Be Required to Follow the Law?’

Published

on

Justices on the U.S. Supreme Court hearing Donald Trump’s claim of absolute immunity early on appeared at best skeptical, were able to get his attorney to admit personal criminal acts can be prosecuted, appeared to skewer his argument a president must be impeached and convicted before he can be criminally prosecuted, and peppered him with questions exposing what some experts see is the apparent weakness of his case.

Legal experts appeared to believe, based on the Justices’ questions and statements, Trump will lose his claim of absolute presidential immunity, and may remand the case back to the lower court that already ruled against him, but these observations came during Justices’ questioning of Trump attorney John Sauer, and before they questioned the U.S. Dept. of Justice’s Michael Dreeben.

“I can say with reasonable confidence that if you’re arguing a case in the Supreme Court of the United States and Justices Alito and Sotomayor are tag-teaming you, you are going to lose,” noted attorney George Conway, who has argued a case before the nation’s highest court and obtained a unanimous decision.

But some are also warning that the justices will delay so Special Counsel Jack Smith’s prosecution of Trump will not take place before the November election.

READ MORE: ‘To Do God Knows What’: Local Elections Official Reads Lara Trump the Riot Act

“This argument still has a ways to go,” observed UCLA professor of law Rick Hasen, one of the top election law scholars in the county. “But it is easy to see the Court (1) siding against Trump on the merits but (2) in a way that requires further proceedings that easily push this case past the election (to a point where Trump could end this prosecution if elected).”

The Economist’s Supreme Court reporter Steven Mazie appeared to agree: “So, big picture: the (already slim) chances of Jack Smith actually getting his 2020 election-subversion case in front of a jury before the 2024 election are dwindling before our eyes.”

One of the most stunning lines of questioning came from Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, who said, “If someone with those kinds of powers, the most powerful person in the world with the greatest amount of authority, could go into Office knowing that there would be no potential penalty for committing crimes. I’m trying to understand what the disincentive is, from turning the Oval Office into, you know, the seat of criminal activity in this country.”

READ MORE: ‘Doesn’t Care if Pregnant Women Live or Die’: Alito Slammed Over Emergency Abortion Remarks

She also warned, “If the potential for criminal liability is taken off the table, wouldn’t there be a significant risk that future presidents would be emboldened to commit crimes with abandon while they’re in office? It’s right now the fact that we’re having this debate because, OLC [Office of Legal Counsel] has said that presidents might be prosecuted. Presidents, from the beginning of time have understood that that’s a possibility. That might be what has kept this office from turning into the kind of crime center that I’m envisioning, but once we say, ‘no criminal liability, Mr. President, you can do whatever you want,’ I’m worried that we would have a worse problem than the problem of the president feeling constrained to follow the law while he’s in office.”

“Why is it as a matter of theory,” Justice Jackson said, “and I’m hoping you can sort of zoom way out here, that the president would not be required to follow the law when he is performing his official acts?”

“So,” she added later, “I guess I don’t understand why Congress in every criminal statute would have to say and the President is included. I thought that was the sort of background understanding that if they’re enacting a generally applicable criminal statute, it applies to the President just like everyone else.”

Another critical moment came when Justice Elena Kagan asked, “If a president sells nuclear secrets to a foreign adversary, is that immune?”

Professor of law Jennifer Taub observed, “This is truly a remarkable moment. A former U.S. president is at his criminal trial in New York, while at the same time the U.S. Supreme Court is hearing his lawyer’s argument that he should be immune from prosecution in an entirely different federal criminal case.”

Watch the videos above or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Blood on Your Hands’: Tennessee Republicans OK Arming Teachers After Deadly School Shooting

 

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

‘Lied Through His Teeth’: Senator Warns RFK Jr. Undermining Vaccine Will ‘Kill’ Kids

Published

2 hours ago

on

May 16, 2025

By

U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT) is accusing Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. of lying during his Senate testimony this week, and warning that the HHS chief’s efforts to destroy faith in the measles vaccine will lead to children dying.

“It’s not a small thing that Trump’s Cabinet thinks Congress and the American people are so dumb that they can tell brazen lies over and over. We can’t normalize this,” Senator Murphy urged.

“The way in which Trump and Trump’s cabinet lie through their teeth, unapologetically and brazenly, to Congress and the American people, is outrageous,” Murphy said in video (below) he posted online Friday. “And I really worry that we risk normalizing it by not calling it out when it happens.”

He called the exchange he had with RFK Jr. “maddening” and “heartbreaking,” and said the HHS Secretary “essentially says that he’s no longer recommending that families get the measles vaccine. That’s going to kill hundreds, if not thousands of kids in this country.”

Murphy then played a clip from Kennedy’s testimony (which NCRM covered earlier this week), and, he said, caught Kennedy in a lie.

RELATED: ‘None of That Is True’: RFK Jr. Fact-Checked Repeatedly in Heated Senate Hearing

“By the way,” Kennedy told Murphy, “I said at the [House] hearing this morning that I was recommending the measles vaccine,” and told him to “look at the transcript.”

“So guess what I did?” Murphy says. “I went and checked the House transcript. It’s hours of testimony. I and my staff watched all of it, and guess what? Nowhere, nowhere in that transcript does he say he recommends the measles vaccine.”

“He lied through his teeth, and he did it because all of these MAGA sycophants have gotten used to lying. Donald Trump does it all the time, so they think they can do it as well. But we can’t normalize this because you can’t run a country if your leaders are lying to you every single day,” the Connecticut Democrat warned.

“RFK Jr. doesn’t support the measles vaccine, and he shouldn’t pretend that he does. He undermines the vaccine on a daily basis and whether we like his conspiracy theory positions or not, he should just be honest with the American people. They should all be honest with the American people, and none of us should normalize or get used to this amount of lying.”

Watch the video below or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘It Meant Assassination’: Trump Blasts ‘Dirty Cop’ Comey for ‘8647’

Continue Reading

News

‘It Meant Assassination’: Trump Blasts ‘Dirty Cop’ Comey for ‘8647’

Published

3 hours ago

on

May 16, 2025

By

President Donald Trump is attacking the FBI Director he fired, Jim Comey, who is reportedly under investigation  over a photo of sea shells formed into the numbers 8647. Top Trump law enforcement and intelligence officials claim it is a call for the assassination of the 47th President, although “86” is generally understood to mean “reject” or “eject,” and, since the 1930s, in restaurant parlance, has meant a menu item is unavailable.

“He knew exactly what that meant,” President Trump told Fox News’ Bret Baier in an interview that will air Friday evening. “A child knows what that meant.”

“If you’re the FBI Director and you don’t know what that meant, that meant ‘assassination.’ And it says it loud and clear,” Trump alleged.

READ MORE: GOP Plan Redefines Dependent Child as ‘Under 7’—But Adds Loophole for Married Couples

“Now, he wasn’t very competent, but he was competent enough to know what that meant, and he did it for a reason, and he was hit so hard because people like me, and they like what’s happening with our country. Our country’s become respected again,” the President claimed. “And he’s calling for the assassination of the president.”

Baier interjected, saying: “Obviously, he apologized and said he —”

“Well, he apologized because he was hit,” Trump also claimed. “Look, he’s a very bad —”

When asked what he wants to see happen to the former Director of the FBI, Trump said he did not want to weigh in, and would let his Attorney General handle it.

“I don’t want to take a position on it because that’s gonna be up to Pam [Bondi] and all of the great people, but I will say this. I think it’s a terrible thing. And when you add his history to that, if he had a clean history, he doesn’t.”

“He’s a dirty cop. He’s a dirty cop. And if he had a clean history, I could understand if there was a leniency. But I’m going to let them make that decision.”

READ MORE: ‘Mad King’: Trump Teases ‘Fourth’ Term to U.S. Troops Overseas

Trump Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard told Fox News on Thursday night she thinks Comey should go to prison for posting the “8647” photo.

Asked, “Do you believe Comey should be in jail?” Gabbard replied, “I do.”

“Any other person with the position of influence that he has,” she added, “people who take very seriously what what a guy of his stature, his experience, and what the propaganda media has built him up to be?”

“I’m very concerned for the president’s life. We’ve already seen assassination attempts,” she continued. “I’m very concerned for his life, and James Comey, in my view, should be held accountable and put behind bars for this.”

But others commenting via social media were quick to point to a number of “86” posts apparently made by right wing influencers and even a former member of Congress, as well as T-shirts for sale during the Biden years.

Watch the video below or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Significant Damage’: Walmart’s ‘Magnitude’ Warning to Consumers Spurs Trump Tariff Critics

 

Image via Reuters

 

Continue Reading

News

‘Mad King’: Trump Teases ‘Fourth’ Term to U.S. Troops Overseas

Published

21 hours ago

on

May 15, 2025

By

During a rally-style appearance before uniformed U.S. troops in Qatar on Thursday, President Donald Trump—serving as their Commander-in-Chief—floated the idea of a “fourth” term and falsely claimed victory in the 2020 election he lost. The appearance drew swift criticism for blurring the line between military service and political theater.

“As you know, we won three elections, okay?” Trump told the largely silent troops (video below). “And some people want us to do a fourth. I don’t know—I’ll have to think about that.”

“You saw the new, the new hat. The hottest hat is, it says, ‘Trump 2028: We’re driving the left crazy.'”

“When you see that. We didn’t need that hat, but, uh, it was it’s been an amazing period of time,” he concluded.

READ MORE: ‘Significant Damage’: Walmart’s ‘Magnitude’ Warning to Consumers Spurs Trump Tariff Critics

Noting that Trump was speaking “at the largest U.S. military installation in the Middle East,” CNN reported that the President “thanked the U.S. troops for political support.”

“There’s – nobody been stronger than the military in terms of backing us, nobody,” Trump said. “So, I just want to thank you all very much. Great honor. Thank you very much.”

CBS News national security coordinating producer Jim LaPorta, who has reported extensively on the military, wrote: “If this was a rally, the president’s remarks would be fine. But in front of service members who are expected to be apolitical, many Defense Department officials would find these remarks inappropriate.”

READ MORE: ‘Deeply Fascist’: Massive Banner of Trump on Government Building Sparks ‘North Korea’ Vibes

The Bulwark’s Sam Stein observed: “Treating the troops like they’re at a campaign rally and sowing doubt about the past and future of American elections — all in one soundbite.”

Democratic pollster and strategist Luke Martin called it “especially jarring to see Trump flirting with blowing a hole in the Constitution in front of an entire crowd of people who literally swore an oath to protect it with their life.”

Independent journalist Mike Rothschild noted: “Making a statement like this in front of active duty troops would have generated months of scandal, hearings, and resignations in years gone by. Now it’s just another Thursday with the Mad King.”

Watch the video below or at this link.

READ MORE: GOP Plan Redefines Dependent Child as ‘Under 7’—But Adds Loophole for Married Couples

 

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.