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

  • Gigan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    53
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    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.

    • tacosanonymous@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      43
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      “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.

      • gregorum@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

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

        • tacosanonymous@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          1 year ago

          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.

          • gregorum@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            oh, sure. I’m not sayin their argument is valid, just why they made it.

        • CileTheSane
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Didn’t the Republicans argue to acquit because “the courts should decide”?

    • benignintervention@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 year ago

      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.