Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) painted a terrifying image as he poked holes in Donald Trump’s claims of presidential immunity.
In a federal appeals court docket on Tuesday, Trump’s lawyer argued that his consumer was immune from prosecution for actions he dedicated whereas he was in workplace, and that presidents can’t be prosecuted until they had been first impeached and convicted by Congress.
If that had been the case, Raskin argued on CNN Tuesday night, a president might actually get away with homicide.
He stated, “As a member of Congress, my first thought was, ’Well, then if the president is going to order out for the assassination of his political rivals and say, there’s a narrow margin in the Senate of two or three votes in the opposition party.
“What’s to keep him from murdering members of the Senate to make sure that he doesn’t get convicted there in order to deny a two-thirds majority?”
“He can’t be impeached or convicted because he’s murdered his opposition, and he can’t be prosecuted for it because he hasn’t been impeached or convicted,” he added.
Echoing many different authorized specialists, Raskin panned the argument, describing it as “utterly ludicrous.”
“Nobody has ever even attempted such an absurd argument in American history, but it shows you how outlandish and deranged Donald Trump’s worldview is at this point,” he stated.
Trump is in search of to have his federal election subversion case thrown out on the premise of presidential immunity, although it’s unlikely he will likely be profitable, given the reactions of the appeals panel judges.
When requested by one decide if a president might face prosecution if he had assassinated a political rival however not been impeached, Trump’s lawyer gave a “qualified yes ― if he is impeached and convicted first.”
