Detailed report on judges’ rebuttal to Trump’s claim that “punishment is possible after impeachment”
“Can special forces order to kill political opponents not be punished without impeachment?”
Emphasis: “There are claims that a lawsuit for immunity can only be filed after a conviction.”
Former U.S. President Donald Trump, who was indicted on charges of attempting to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election, claimed presidential immunity in a federal appeals court, but major U.S. media outlets reported on the 9th (local time) that the court is expected to reject it.
The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) reports Washington D.,C. It was pointed out that Trump-related lawsuits are at a critical crossroads as the federal appeals court appears likely to reject candidate Trump’s immunity claim.
Three judges of the U.S. Federal Appeals Court in Washington, D.C., bombarded Trump’s lawyer John Sauer with questions during the trial in which Trump appeared. The judges responded that it was difficult to believe Attorney Sauer’s claim that even if the president orders the military to kill his political opponents, he will be exempted if the Senate does not impeach him.
Judge Karen Henderson, the only Republican government-appointed judge, also appeared to disagree with the core of Trump’s argument. It refutes claims that Trump’s efforts to overturn his loss to Biden are subject to immunity under the president’s constitutional duty to ensure enforcement of election laws.
Judge Henderson pointed out, “There appears to be a contradiction in the claim that it is okay to violate criminal law in accordance with the president’s constitutional duty to ensure enforcement of the law.”
However, differences of opinion were also revealed among the judges during the trial on this day. Judge Henderson said that if Trump’s immunity is completely rejected, there could be a flood of partisan indictments. Judge Henderson indicated that he may remit the case to Judge Tanya Chuktan to determine whether Trump’s actions were public or private. The decision helps Trump’s campaign to delay the trial ahead of the election.
No matter what decision the federal appeals court makes, it is certain that this case will be appealed to the Supreme Court.
Depending on the speed and outcome of the trial on immunity claims, the possibility and timing of Trump’s other three trials, including the election interference trial against him, will be determined.
◆Trump, who doesn’t have to appear, consults with his lawyers and glares at the judge.
Former President Trump was not required to appear at the federal appeals court trial on this day. Trump, who appeared wearing a dark suit and red tie, sat at the right end of the defense table and whispered with lawyer Will Sharp. He also leaned his body forward and glared at the judges when Democratic government-appointed judges Michelle Childs and Judge Florence Pan questioned Sauer.
When government prosecutor James Pierce spoke, Trump and his lawyers also exchanged notes with each other.
The presidential immunity trial began about three months ago. Judge Chuktan, who is in charge of the trial of Trump’s objection to the presidential election results, dismissed Trump’s lawsuit seeking immunity, and when Trump appealed, he decided not to hold a trial on the merits until a final decision is made.
Trump is not looking to win the immunity case. The main goal is to delay the trial until after the presidential election in November. This is because after winning the presidential election, he can order the indictment against himself to be withdrawn or pardon himself.
At trial, when Sauer’s attorney argued that U.S. courts had not tried a president for his conduct while in office for more than 200 years, Judge Henderson countered by saying that until Trump was indicted, the court did not need to consider whether the president’s conduct while in office was criminal. did.
Judge Henderson, however, agreed with Sauer’s argument that if the court handles the election case, there will be “a flood” of calls for punishment for the president’s actions while in office.
Prosecutor Pierce then argued that Trump had committed deviant behavior and that punishing him would not trigger a partisan prosecution. He emphasized that at least since President Richard Nixon was pardoned after resigning in the wake of the Watergate scandal, it has become clear that a president can also be criminally prosecuted for his actions while in office.
Judges Fan and Childs also expressed skepticism about Trump’s claim of immunity.
When Judge Fan asked Attorney Sauer, “If the President sells pardons, sells military secrets, and orders SEAL Team 6 (the U.S. Navy’s top special forces unit) to kill his political opponents, if he is not impeached, is he exempt?” Attorney Sauer answered yes.
Prosecutor Pierce then emphasized that it was “extremely dangerous” for a president to order the military to kill a political opponent and avoid punishment as long as he resigns before being impeached.
Judge Fan also noted that Sauer said a president is not immune only after being impeached for official duties. Judge Fan pointed out that Trump’s claim of broad immunity relies solely on the argument that the court can only rule on an impeached president.
Judge Childs refuted Sauer’s argument that the federal appeals court does not have authority to rule on immunity issues. He pointed out that there is also an argument that only after Trump is convicted can he appeal immunity.
Meanwhile, both Trump’s lawyers and prosecutors asked the court to make a quick decision. There is no time limit for the federal appeals court’s decision.
◆The purpose of delaying the trial has been achieved to some extent.
In a campaign fundraising email sent on the night of the 8th, Trump claimed that he could not campaign because of the trial. However, this claim is different from the facts and is an attempt to emphasize that the campaign is being hindered by the trial. After spending eight nights at his golf course in Sterling, Virginia, less than a week before voting in Iowa’s Republican presidential primary, Trump appeared at the courthouse accompanied by several security vehicles.
After the trial ended, Trump remained in the courtroom until all three judges left the court, looked around at the audience filling the courtroom, and then walked slowly with his lawyers and exited through a side door.
Afterwards, the cars carrying him arrived at the Waldorf Astoria Hotel a few blocks away. “I don’t think the prosecution of his political opponents is fair,” Trump said at the hotel, which he owned and operated when he was president. “The country will be in trouble,” he said, condemning the indictment against him.
Source: Donga
Mark Jones is a world traveler and journalist for News Rebeat. With a curious mind and a love of adventure, Mark brings a unique perspective to the latest global events and provides in-depth and thought-provoking coverage of the world at large.