Absolute Insanity
As has been widely reported, in yesterday's Appeals Court hearing on Trump's claim of "absolute immunity," Judge Florence Pan asked a hypothetical question about if a President who used the Navy Seals to assassinate a political rival could be criminally prosecuted. Trump lawyer John Sauer made the bizarre assertion that unless a president was impeached and convicted on a charge first, he couldn't be prosecuted later for it and be held accountable in any way, since it wouldn't be a criminal act.
I refer to this as a "bizarre" assertion because -- well, it was the most polite adjective I could think of.
The only thing that Mr. Sauer left out was saying that his client should henceforth no longer be referred to as Trump, but as "007," since in his mind he apparently has a license to kill. That would certainly fit in with Trump's egomaniacal fantasies about himself, after all, not to mention his acolytes' ongoing grandiose fan art.
DOJ attorney James Pearce responded by asking "What kind of world we are living in if a President orders his Seal team to assassinate a political rival" and it's not a criminal act. Calling it a "frightening future," he offered the idea that under this Trump- Sauer theory such a President could simply resign from office before an impeachment, thereby evading prosecution and all legal accountability, since there would be no criminal act.
I should add that another reason I refer to John Sauer's claim as "bizarre" is because even I could immediately think of two other ways a President could get away with murder, ploys that are even worse than what attorney Pearce suggested. And the closest I came to law school was walking past the School of Law building on campus when at UCLA for graduate school in screenwriting.
One is the scenario where the House of Representatives is controlled by the President's own party and doesn't impeach him for the assassination -- or the Senate is controlled by the President's party and doesn't convict him -- in which case the President not only would get away with murder, but he would continue being President. No resignation necessary.
And the other gambit would be even more basic -- that no one in Congress is even aware that the President was involved in ordering the murder, and it's not discovered until long after the Chief Executive finishes his or her term -- or perhaps is even re-elected -- and then leaves office. No impeachment, no crime.
These aren't difficult situations to come up with. And there are three of them -- at least. And yet Trump and his lawyer (one has to suspect at Trump's bidding, since the suggestion is so utterly bizarre, horrifying and infantile) actually put them on the table in a court of law. Actually claiming that a President could order the murder of a political rival and that, unless impeached and convicted, it wouldn't be a crime.
By the way, on top of this lunacy, there are two things they didn't seem to consider when making the "explanation."
The first is that with the explanation offered being so monumentally childish, sickeningly unthinkable and devoid of legal thinking, it risks putting the Appeals judges in the position of discrediting all of attorney Sauer's subsequent arguments for having no clue about the law or what he's talking about.
And the second is Trump here is arguing that, right now, Joe Biden could call in the Navy Seals to murder his political rival -- who, of course, is Trump! -- and not be prosecuted for it as a crime, either because Democrats control the Senate and (at least in Trump's fevered mind) wouldn't convict Biden in an impeachment trial, or it could be covered up and not discovered until long after the President leaves office.
But…but…but here's one more reason why Trump's legal team is so weirdly incompetent.
After the hearing, a small press event was held with Trump and his lawyers. And one of his legal team, John Lauro, in arguing how grossly illegal he believed the DOJ's prosecution of Trump was for his part in the Insurrection, stated for the cameras -- "Joe Biden could be prosecuted for trying to stop this man from becoming the next president of the United States."
Now, stop a moment and consider that. Right after arguing in Appeals Court that Presidents have "absolute immunity," even if he orders a murder and isn't impeached -- it turns out that Trump lawyer John Lauro is saying he doesn't believe that a President has "absolute immunity"!!
This yesterday was Trump's legal team.
It turns out that another of his lawyers, parking garage attorney Alina Habba, was on to something when she suggested on Monday that she'd rather be pretty than smart because, as she put it, "I can fake being smart."
Perhaps this is merely the standard of the only lawyers who will agree to work for Trump these days. And she was just talking about fitting in.
Comments