At the DC Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday morning, President Trump’s attorney, John Sauer, made his case to a panel of three judges about Trump’s claims of immunity in Jack Smith’s case.
Let me introduce the three justices who will be presiding over the oral arguments on immunity claims: President Biden’s appointee Florence Pan; President Biden’s appointee Michelle Childs; and President George W. Bush’s appointee Karen Henderson.
Don’t miss this! Carry faith with you everywhere with the Exclusive National Prayer Coin!
Surprisingly, Jack Smith said in a federal appeals court that Trump’s claim of immunity may allow him to encourage his supporters to carry out violent crimes against politicians.
According to Trump’s attorneys, there is no way to bring charges against him for any alleged “crimes” he may have done while serving as US president.
“In 234 years of American history, no president ever faced criminal prosecution for his official acts. Until 19 days ago, no court had ever addressed whether immunity from such prosecution exists,” As per CBS News, Trump’s attorneys wrote in the complaint from last month. “To this day, no appellate court has addressed it. The question stands among the most complex, intricate, and momentous issues that this Court will be called on to decide.”
Jack Smith argues that given his possible involvement in illegal crimes like ordering the assassination of political opponents or selling nuclear secrets, Trump shouldn’t be exempt from punishment.
“The implications of the defendant’s broad immunity theory are sobering. In his view, a court should treat a President’s criminal conduct as immune from prosecution as long as it takes the form of correspondence with a state official about a matter in which there is a federal interest, a meeting with a member of the Executive Branch, or a statement on a matter of public concern,” based on Jack Smith’s 82-page document that The Gateway Pundit examined.
Trump’s camp contended that if he is shielded by the presidential immunity defense, what would prevent him from disclosing his “inciting his supporters during a State of the Union address to kill opposing lawmakers…”
“That approach would grant immunity from criminal prosecution to a President who accepts a bribe in exchange for directing a lucrative government contract to the payer; a President who instructs the FBI Director to plant incriminating evidence on a political enemy; a President who orders the National Guard to murder his most prominent critics; or a President who sells nuclear secrets to a foreign adversary, because in each of these scenarios, the President could assert that he was simply executing the laws; or communicating with the Department of Justice; or discharging his powers as Commander-in-Chief; or engaging in foreign diplomacy. Under the defendant’s framework, the Nation would have no recourse to deter a President from inciting his supporters during a State of the Union address to kill opposing lawmakers—thereby hamstringing any impeachment proceeding—to ensure that he remains in office unlawfully,” Jack Smith wrote.
ALERT! Major Water Restrictions In Effect!
This Tuesday morning, the DC Circuit Court of Appeals began exciting oral arguments. Judge Chutkan has, in the meanwhile, ordered a halt to all actions in Jack Smith’s DC case until the appeal is resolved.
After hearing oral arguments on Tuesday, a panel of three justices voiced skepticism on Trump’s claims of immunity. Attorney John Sauer was questioned by a judge chosen by Biden over whether or not Trump would be prosecuted if he gave the order for SEAL Team 6 to kill his political rivals.
“Could a president who ordered SEAL Team 6 to assassinate a political rival, and is not impeached, would he be subject to criminal prosecution?” John Sauer was questioned by Biden appointment Judge Florence Pan.
The Gateway Pundit’s buddy and former Missouri solicitor general, John Sauer, said, “If he were impeached and convicted first… my answer is qualified yes, there is a political process that would have to occur under the structure of our Constitution which would require impeachment and conviction by the Senate in these exceptional cases…”
This is a ridiculous hypothetical issue that, of course, is reminiscent of Jack Smith’s plea to the federal appeals court.
It was expected that CNN would capitalize on this and heaped praise on John Sauer.
AUDIO
Trump will take the case all the way to the US Supreme Court and request even another postponement if the DC Circuit Court of Appeals rules that he is not entitled to presidential immunity.
