Amy Coney Barrett Asks Trump Lawyer Point Blank About Prosecution Of Presidents Ordering Coups
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 24 апр 2024
- During Thursday’s oral arguments in Trump v. United States, Justice Amy Coney Barrett questioned the attorney for Former President Trump D. John Sauer about impeachment.
Fuel your success with Forbes. Gain unlimited access to premium journalism, including breaking news, groundbreaking in-depth reported stories, daily digests and more. Plus, members get a front-row seat at members-only events with leading thinkers and doers, access to premium video that can help you get ahead, an ad-light experience, early access to select products including NFT drops and more:
account.forbes.com/membership...
Stay Connected
Forbes on Facebook: forbes
Forbes Video on Twitter: / forbes
Forbes Video on Instagram: / forbes
More From Forbes: forbes.com
America is hanging by a thread
If that’s the case, it’s doing far better than every other country.
It’s refreshing to actually hear the arguments and the system working .
Canada is already doomed.
There is no checks and balances, and once you’re in power, it is absolute .
@@Ont785 Pierre Castro as dictatoe for life, good god help Canada.
These people in the Halls of Congress are pushing its citizens to submit or fight for their rights.Those are the only options and they seem indifferent to what must be chosen .If we submit they kill us slowly,if we fight back they kill us quickly.What has happened to USA?Even Donald Trump is fighting this nonsense while in peril and his only crime is questioning the authority of the power elite ,who control the media and the courts in many of our major cities.A little guy like me doesn’t stand a chance in this society anymore.
Our forefathers were very smart when they designed & structured our government to have checks & balances built in to limit any one branch or person from attaining absolute power & control.They had experienced living under a totalitarian tyrannical government in Europe & they knew that a time might occur when ONE PARTY would try to force a ONE PARTY RULE SOCIALIST COMMUNIST GOVERNMENT by bastardizing the rule of law, subverting the constitution & more.
The funny thing is You guys You think the President calls the shots .
Listening to this just made me wanna clear my throat every 10 seconds.
That voice should disqualify her/him. Truly. It's painful to listen to. And a distraction.
(Is it a her? Or a him?)
@@juanitachristner5009 its a him lol and just be glad you dont have that voice, don't judge just feel grateful xD
@MrMentaliamorphic
Eh, judgements allowed. This case shouldn't be happening.
That voice is the only voice of reason attempting to save this country from making a president obsolete.
Also a powerless president will forever empower the deep state which lurks in all those agencies of the executive branch. They will keep growing in power and any president that dares to oppose them will get imprisoned.
What a dolt! The impeachment clause applies to any impeachable person.
But the executive branch is the president, therefore he can not be prosecuted until he is removed from office, even then the question remains, were his actions taken as official duties.
Tell that to Schumer
But the president has the ability to pardon, and the president nominates the attorney general. Therefore he or she cannot be prosecuted until you remove them from office, thereby eliminating the conflict of interest.
@@bigfoot-id8bv He can be Impeached not criminally prosecuted.
In Trumps case, he was impeached to remove him from office and not because he committed high crimes and misdemeanors. That's why he wasn't convicted.
That attorney really has an unfortunate voice lol
He sounds like he has been smoking cigerettes and drinking whiskey since he was twelve years old!
Did you hear the other one? Sounds like he/she/it/them/they has/have been drinking soyjizz lattes every morning for decades.
@@danielabilez3619 Sounds like he’s gargling whiskey as he speaks.
RFK like....
He and Kennedy should get together and drive us all crazy. Do they have hearing aids to filter out the noise.
Why in the world are we still chasing this stupidity. How much more money do we need to spend on this joke.
But but but they got him this time……
@kellykiser7600 OH, and this is what they said last time, and last time, and last time and well you get it right.
@@jamesfeatherstone3140 Who Are They?????
Cult
@@jamesfeatherstone3140 No they mean it this time!! I saw it on The View and CNN and my blue haired co worker with a dozen piercings said this time they really got him.
The Constitution gives Congress the right to impeach and the Senate the right to investigate and press charges. But the Senate should not have a right to just throw it in the trash can as they did recently I feel that's obstruction of justice in the Senate whoever's involved should be investigated and censored or impeached
They did it because the impeachment is a total sham!
You're a little off here. The House makes impeachment charges, the Senate holds the impeachment trial. Historically, no Senate has outright dismissed all charges sent by the House for impeachment. What Schumer did in the case of Mayorkas, whether you like him or not, was unprecedented. But these aren't your parents' Democrats anymore; they're closer to CommieCrats...rules/laws do not apply to them!
Yes totally agree
They voted just like a Jury would.They did nothing wrong but because they didn't vote to remove Trump did not make them wrong. Just you did not agree.
...and all the dirty laundry exposed to his employers, We The People
Except for Mayorkas right - he can't get impeached.
Talk to Schumer about that. That trial didn't happen because of him.
No reason to impeach someone who hasn’t committed hi crimes and misdemeanors, you were just fooled by the trump show.
He can't get convicted by the Senate. He was impeached in the House.
🎯
He WAS impeached. The impeachment was dismissed by the Senate.
Everyone equal under the law. We fought a war over this.
We fought a lot of wars over that… looks like we are still fighting.
The idea of a court in NY or Georgia deciding a federal election is absurd. Yes, Presidents should have immunity. Presidents are on a global stage.
@@jamescarter8311IMMUNITY FOR WHAT EXACTLY???? CORRUPTION????
@@sandrarufus8198like biden? They have immunity from bogus indictments from a corrupt president like biden.
@@sandrarufus8198Funny no other president ever needed total immunity until that grifting, habitual liar, sexual predator came along.
I bet no one would be okay with Pres Biden having immunity.
Why are people acting like we can't read exactly what our Founders and Frameworkers set forth in our 3 separate branches of government and the power of We the People are to govern ourselves...we are literally having troubles because government has gotten too big and bloated, time to strap government back into its chains which is our Constitution.
Did you actually pass 8th grade civics?
People want to believe what they read agrees with them and pretend that what the Constitution says agrees with them .
@@Lizabitch Did you?
Absolutely
@@jamescarter8311 yes, and law school
Now sit down and be quiet
Wow what a bunch of BS
Yeah trumps argument is BS
THANKS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The more Amy challenges him the more he gets an opportunity to present his case. I love it.
It's hilarious, he's exempt from criminal charges and impeachment must be a gateway to criminal charges, .. that he's exempt from... word salad..
Crimes are now funny?
@@douglemay7989 no, the boldness of the kangaroo SCOTUS is.
@@ericcallender1575 Impeachment is a means to remove the president if he's doing anything wrong. Laws after all are a guideline that congress elected by the people have the ultimate say on. Congress could eliminate the supreme court and interpreter of laws if they choose. Congress determines what law and crimes are. Congress doesn't need anyone to interpret law for them. You are trying to deflect from the fact that the president gets immunity and at anytime he can be removed by congress unlike a Monarch or dictator.
@@rickybobby7276 the President gets immunity from some things, not total immunity, or else he could murder anyone. Also, it wasn't President tRump, it was candidate tRump, that's why the government did not pay for all the fake trials and investigation into supposed election fraud. Good try though.
What’s with the voices of these lawyers??? The prosecution sounds like a chipmunk and this dude sounds like he’s gargling gravel.
Lol!
That guy testifyed in Congress, did a smack down.
I guess this guy and RFK won't be having a yelling match any time soon
He doesn't need immunity he can pardon himself. Duh.
😂😂😂
We have forgotten what our Liberty means to each and every one of us.Having heart standing in gap for our family and friends. We desperately need to get it back. Times are getting tough out there. Good jobs are hard to find. I thank God for our family and friends and the Liberty and the heart He gives us everyday.
Liberty is not possible without unity. Join the purple party. Slogan? Not a party. Let's bring God back unto the constitution in a way that the godless will jump to vote and the religious freedom we cherish will be strengthened. I think it's possible and will strengthen our union too. We need a sense of community back, one that is truly free for everyone
Are you living in Jamaica? The last Jobs report was gangbusters! Stock market is on an 8 year HIGH! WTF are babbling about?
Amy asked what was important. No impeachment. No crime. No conviction.
Thank you for the simple breakdown. ❤
Nixon, no impeachment, pardoned. Why a pardon if no conviction in the Senate?
@@MLeone2010 - I'm not saying the pardon was valid but the purpose was to shutdown the attempt to prosecute a president so as not to damage the country further.
What he’s saying is completely ridiculous. Especially since the leader of the Republican Party did not vote to impeach because he said the criminal justice system should handle it. So they won’t impeach because they want the justice system to handle it. That’s what Mitch McConnell said. The lawyer was right. Mitch McConnell would’ve been wrong saying that we the majority know he was not wrong.
hey Mr. RJ TRUTH, trump was impeached, of course, and his own lawyers said he shouldn't be held accountable in impeachment because if he committed a crime, he could be indicted in criminal court AFTER impeachment. (Amy says that here). And now they are saying he's immune. Didn't you get that she's calling him on this??
I hate fast talkers. And his voice.is.horrible. I need this in writing!
If you haven't already, tap the title of the video, then tap the Show Transcript button. I sometimes have to do that to follow people who talk too fast or have grating voices....or in this case, both of those problems.
Mr Sauer needs to lay off them damn cigs.
I didnt realize Marge Simpson was one of Trump's lawyers.
I'm for Trump, but that is funny 😂
More like Patty or Selma but yeah
Ohhh homie
😂
TRUMP 2024!!!…. Yes it sounds like Marge 😂
Glass of water, please, must have water
Exactly, what coup....
The one the DNC has been working on for 8 years.
Jan 6
I think they are referring to the one when they were going to hang that guy.
ruclips.net/video/stkRp_tQfJg/видео.htmlsi=_NBse7X4GQU_lMB7
Yes, the democrats performed a coup on Jan 6.@scottinga9819
You know...the one where they stormed the capital and beat cops almost to death. The one were fake electors tried to pose as the actual electors in several states all directed by the likes of Navaro. The one were Trump tried to get a governor to "find" 11,000 some odd votes...you know...that coup.
Can they find attorneys that have normal voices?
This guy sounds like the most corrupt mob lawyer ever
Never underestimate the profound wisdom and vision of our Founding Fathers. America has been a successful republic because of the Constitution and establishing this government on laws.
Unfortunately maga doesn't like the system our forefathers gave us...
Unfortunately they twist the constitution to help Trump. He should have banned from taking office because Trump started the Insurrection. It states clearly in black and white.
Anyone who is involved in an Insurrection is forever banned from taking office. But some how they got him out of it stating it didn't apply to him.
What a bunch of bs
The speed at which he speaks and his raspy voice is distracting at best
I do not like the voice but I understand everything he is saying.
A true judge … AMY YOU ROCK
Why do you say that? Can you elaborate because I’m lost in all of this! Help!
No she doesn't...she is absolutely a Disgraceful Supreme Court Judge 😤
@@carolynpeisert218 You think she is being mean to Stinky?
@douglemay7989 no, she is not Constitutional and that is the purpose of Supreme Court judges
Wow
This guy could be an auctioneer
Amy’s not the sweet woman she pretended to be.
Most times I meet a “sweet woman” I automatically assume that it’s a front…
Once out of sight and behind closed doors…
Some man is going to pay the price.👍🥃
No one with a law degree is a sweet person.
It is terrifying how intelligent and classy Justice Barrett is. We are lucky to have her.
I wouldn’t want to ask this guy questions so I wouldn’t have to listen to that voice.
A lot of words, zero proves, boh!
What about cia led coups as in many places including Ukraine in 2014
100% irrelevant to the issue at hand.
@@scott8xxx532 presidents can’t do coups single-handedly…the cia does and has done this
@@starseedenergy996 still irrelevant to the issue at hand.
we can name all sorts of crimes (allegedly) committed by presidents, or with presidents knowledge and involvement, over the years. but they don't need any more examples.
the point of this case is whether or not the president has immunity from crimes. they already have a few examples they're using, they don't need any more, much less an exhaustive list. they're on to exploring and debating the underlying arguments for and against such immunity.
@@scott8xxx532 the title of video is immunity from coups not crime in general. That is what I am referring to.
@@scott8xxx532 A PRESIDENT DOES NOT HAVE IMMUNITY FROM CRIMINAL LIABILITY OR PROSECUTION!!!! NEITHER CIVIL NOR CRIMINAL IMMUNITY IS EXPLICITLY GRANTED IN THE CONSTITUTION OR ANY FEDERAL STATUTE!!!!
There is no way the SCOTUS is gonna decide that he has sweeping immunity.
No unlawful order be carried out
Amy getting tough like this with her questions is a very good sign. She’s covering her butt for her ruling/rationale. 5-4 in favor of (Trump) presidential immunity.
Good. Joe has Seal Team Six on alert, how many justices need to go?
They won’t vote in favor of absolute immunity, if they do, they won’t be needed anymore
I doubt it. She is too wishy washy. Why does she follow the Constitution in some cases and in other cases it is like she never read it.
There is no way they will vote to give Trump total immunity. That means if he gets into office (or any other president) they can commit as many crimes as they want knowing that they cannot be convicted - Dictators do that!
Absolute immunity would be insane.
I don’t remember him ordering anything.
"Find me 11,000 votes".
@@markkozlowski3674 thats not a coup lol. Buy a dictionary
@@markkozlowski3674 That wouldn't stand up in any court. It means absolutely nothing. There was massive election fraud going on and Trump had every reason to believe the votes were there. He wasn't demanding they be created. If he were, he would have said it that way.
@@markkozlowski3674 now a fake dossier used to try to take down a sitting president, is an attempted coup. You lefties believe too much coming out of your tv. Amazes me there are many on the left that still haven’t been informed the russia dossier was false and proven so 😂
She didn’t say he did, she said IF that were to occur
Remember all lawyers can go down if not in order with the truth only as that is the way a law works,
It sounds like the character actor Percy Helton is arguing in front of the court.
Amy's not buying into it and that is comforting.
Amy is wrong.
@@jamescarter8311 Not to her. Her opinion matter's.
Buying into what??? I’m lost on all this! Help me navigate which side Amy is leaning!
@@reneesantiago6496justice Barrett was not buying Trump’s argument. She was pointing out the ludicrousness of such god like deference to any POTUS or former POTUS.
@@dcj-bz4on So a conservative justice….appointed by Trump is leaning towards stripping his immunity?????
Is that RFK talking
Wow RFK JR showing up for the hearing. Interesting.
His voice is getting better !!!
Presidents should act lawfully.
Because he wasn't convicted from impeachment? As they say - you can indict a ham sandwich and I suppose you could impeachment it, too. But you need a conviction.
No, they say that a grand jury WOULD indict a ham sandwich. Grand juries do whatever the prosecution tells them to do, over 99% of the time. That isn't an exaggeration.
Try again: In California law, the grand jury is an independent body made up of a specified number of citizens of a particular county, whose job is to perform the following functions:
Determine whether or not charges should be brought against you in certain criminal cases, and
Inquire into matters of civil concern in the county, such as county officers’ salaries and the budgets and operations of county governments; grand juries are an arm of the court.
In some California counties, the same jury focuses on both criminal and civil matters.
When grand juries are used in California criminal casesCalifornia prosecutors must bring felony charges in one of two ways:
They may hold a “preliminary hearing” before a judge or magistrate, at which you are present and represented by a criminal defense lawyer. If the judge determines after the hearing that there is enough evidence to try you for the crime, then you will be charged through a document called an “information;”9 OR
They may hold a grand juror proceeding, at which you are not present. If the jury decides that there is probable cause to try you for the crime, then you will be charged through a document called an “indictment.”10
Unlike a preliminary hearing, grand juries are held before you appear for an arraignment (the first step in the California criminal court process). Hope this clears up some misconceptions. Loved your “more than 99% of the time” quote…now THAT was funny. SF🇺🇸
The whole idea that you cannot take an ex president to trial if he is not impeached is ridiculous. The senate essentially votes on party lines.
@@logangodofcandy Let me guess...unless there indicting a Democrat...right?
Schumer, Biden, Pelosi, Mayorkis, Ralph nadler should be impeached!
Couldn't tell if the Attorney was either Patty or Selma Bouvier
The President IS under the same set of laws as the rest of us! So Mr. Sauer needs to sit down and let the matter at hand settle the issue!
When his throat croaks he’s lying!
SCOTUS has a hot boomerang in their hands
I thought no one is above the law in America. Looks like cult leaders are 😢
Has the Supreme Court heard ALL the facts. They should bring in Tucker..hehe.
The guy Faux News fired for lying?
The guy who does propaganda for Russia? I hear he’s busy filming a special about all of the food and freedom in North Korea.
What are the details of the impeachment? I don't have access to the information.
Immunity means exempt
Argument falsely presumes that "high crimes and misdemeanors" are statutory.
I noticed that too... they just sidestepped over it.
There was no coup.
Exactly. This lawyer is off base. Trump never attempted a coup. Never attempted an insurrection. He was pursuing election integrity and saw all the chacanery by the Democrats. He saw the vote flipped. He heard reports in Georgia that many Trump votes were not counted. That should be the argument. This attorney also needs to slow down. You don't make your case more effective by speed talking, especially if your voice is not the best quality to begin with.
There was a coup. But it wasn't Trump. It was the crime syndicate that is our government and media. They stole our election and installed their puppet biden.
@@surfrunnerd8457 I am hoping this case goes forward so that, if Trump did not attempt a coup, all of America will know it before November. He will get more votes that way.
Your evidence being...?
@@Article95 evidence is far too expansive for you tube comments. But I'm absolutely sure you are aware already. But aside from evidence of corruption in 2020 elections, just as in Iran-Contra, Watergate, 9/11, Enron, the biggest clue to corruption is usually in the cover up. The Democrats blocked forensic audits of the Dominion machines, the Democrats have done their best to stifle any probes into election fraud, the Democrats have branded anyone wishing to investigate as election deniers and conspiracy theorists. As for me, if I was elected President with the most votes of any political candidate in U.S. history yet am unable to draw a crowd or any interest in public appearances , and I KNEW the results were legit, I would encourage audits and investigations to clear my name, set history straight, and give Americans confidence in our elections. If I have something to hide I would run in the other direction. "We have assembled the largest election fraud organization in the history of American politics." - Joe Biden
He made that declaration to his base when he was being severely criticized for not campaigning in 2020. He sent the signal out: it's fixed. No need to worry. I don't need to campaign.
The lawyer sounds like the Droid in Jabba's shop. "You are a protocol Droid, are you not?"
"These are not the droids you are looking for" -- ok I'll see myself out.
Mad house!!!
Why is supreme court asking what if any damn way. The supreme court is suppose to guard the law and not change the law. Changing the law is by Congress.
Locke. Supreme Court interprets the constitution. Marbury v madison.
@@lileos2837 yes true but they cant change it without Congress
@@lileos2837 An amendment may be proposed by a two-thirds vote of both Houses of Congress, or, if two-thirds of the States request one, by a convention called for that purpose.
@@lileos2837 the supreme Court can not change the constitution that's why this case and there concerns must go back to lower court and then back to Congress
Yeah and guess which one we might need....by the people and for the people. And ppl are PISSED! Let's let level heads prevail.
Money and power = corruption
I am lost 😂😂😂
Omg That lawyer's voice is horrific!!
What's your excuse?
Sounds rehearsed - Barrett and Trumps Lawyer we’re ready.
No, it doesn't. You just don't like how that one line of questioning went
How do they claim they know what the “framers” meant?
Read the constitution. It's PLAIN English. The same English that people living in trailer homes with a 5th grade education would use and understand. The founders explained that that was the point.
Try Reading "The Federalist Papers". It will tell you exactly what they meant.
@@r.mucklin1703 Don't forget "The Anti-Federalist Papers" as well. I'd never even heard of these until well after I'd graduated from 'public' school. Gee, I wonder why a public school doesn't even *mention* them? 🤔
It's not as readily available 'in print' at the Federalist Papers are, but you can get them - they're just pricey. 😕
@@logangodofcandy can you post a response without so many fallacies in it? If the framers intent is based on a 5th graders education level then this would also mean that we don't need a supreme court with educations higher than 5th grade. Did you even read your comment before posting it?
@@GripFreakNot at all. Its the CHALLENGES to the framer's intent and language that demands SCOTUS, and its defense and reiteration of same sometimes posed by 5th graders as we've seen recently. We all should be thanking GOD for the establishment of our three branches - not perfect, there's some holes that need patching, nevertheless, the best, safest, system in the world
Is that a voice from the military hospital joke?
Only applies to your political opponents!!!
Sadly, I'm getting the idea that the -ginzberts- roberts court does not want Trump to get out of this; that they are on board with keeping him out of the Oval office "by any means necessary".
This is a good thing, is it not? Otherwise Biden could order the assassination of Trump the day he leaves office, and by Sauer's argument, Biden cannot be criminally prosecuted because by the GOP Senate's own rules, a former president cannot be convicted in an impeachment trial.
No one should be above the law. Donald Trump should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
Mr. Sauer sound like he gargles with Drano. Poor man
Sounds like Merrick Garland talking. I didn’t know he was Trump’s lawyer! What CLICKBAIT!
Awesome attorney, knows his shit
Would you favour Biden to be indicted for accepting bribes if evidence established that? Or should Biden as president be absolutely immune from prosecution? Lots of Maga people want Biden indicted thus undermining Trump's very own argument.
@@BizznessBox That's treason, perishable by death. It's not what Trumps arguing. Nice try.
Yeah, he knows how to shovel it.
Well, if all they feed you is shit, best learn how to shovel it.
That is not what Article 1 section 3 clause 7 of the Constitution says!! It reads...."Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification hold and enjoy any Office honor, Trust, or Profit under the United States; but the party CONVICTED shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgement and Punishment according to law." ....No conviction ny the senate no legal action may ensue, immunity stands!!
That just states that he is still liable for indictment after being impeached not that he isn't liable for indictment absent of impeachment.
@@bobturnbull18 Nope!! An impeachment means very little without a conviction by the Senate!!
😂😂😂 impeachment at it's heart a political process. It is not by nature designed to be a criminal trial. This is why Nixon was pardoned after resigning.
Basically what it is saying is that impeachment does not carry jeopardy with it. There are actually five different ways in which a person can be indicted for the same crime without incurring double jeopardy, but none of them are required to indict for any of the others: articles of impeachment, military code of justice, federal law, state law, and international law. Usually you will see a maximum of two used, though it would be interesting to find a crime worthy of indictment on all five levels. (EDIT: I guess tribal law would be a sixth possibility, though I believe that usually falls under the blanket of federal.)
Otis Redding said it. And this court is doing it...."sitting....wasting time..."
Uh 🙄 TYPO ALERT ‼️ In the description it says … “Former President Donald J. Sauer…” 👀
Ooh. Asks him point blank! Like the gentleman said, it was unconstitutional to press these charges. I think her answered all her questions with cases to back up what he had to say. Real cases. Not cases made up using ChatGPT.... TRUMP2024
Would you favour Biden to be indicted for accepting bribes if evidence established that? Or should Biden as president be absolutely immune from prosecution? Lots of Maga people want Biden indicted thus undermining Trump's very own argument.
@@wurzelausc rule for thee, not for me. All these people saying the President can not be held accountable seem to fail to realize that that gate swings both ways
If the POTUS is immune from prosecution just because a later POTUS could persecute him by misusing the DOJ, they seem to miss the little thing that the later POTUS-instead of misusing the DOJ-as also being immune just could send the SEALs to persecute the FPOTUS.
All the following would need to be in line with some DOJ persecution if the POTUS demands so: The AG, the special investigator and all in his team, the Prosecutor and all of his team, the grand jury, the randomly selected Judge, the randomly selected jurors cleared by the defense, and the appellate courts judges… including the highest appellate judges: the SCOTUS justices… since they could always take on a case.
If one argues that this could ever be the case, one is arguing that the whole Constitutional justice system is very flawed and unsafe.
And a SCOTUS justice arguing this, is really arguing that the SCOTUS itself is corrupt.
@@abrakkehakka1357 Alito is arguing a deep state. I don t understand why they generalised the question - "a president". Why was not the question: "Can this president under these circumstances be prosecuted or not?" Because it is impossible to foresee all eventualities and crazy people.
So far, Jobama Obiden is enjoying complete immunity. Oh that's right! Rules for THEE and all that jazz. Smh
At least Donald is finally seeing the inside of a court room. The worst President in history, responsible for tens of thousands of deaths.
What crime did Obama do? Please give me specifics.
He is not "enjoying complete immunity," as there is still an impeachment inquiry going on. There is a process to go through; you don't just get to skip right to acquittal because it's "your guy" or skip right to conviction because he happens to be on the other side of the line. Trump is going through the same process. If you don't like the way this country works, write your Congressperson and tell them that you want an oligarchy where the other side are second class and hunted for sport.
I don't know who is speaking with his throat sounding so raw. It reminds me of Bobby Kennedy. I really like the guy but I can't stand to listen to him for very long. It makes my throat burn and my head hurt!
You have to admire this lawyer for being able to navigate this verbal assault of obvious entrapment snx stonewalling of an interview
I'm not that smart, its hard for me to follow. That's why I hire a lawyer. But i understand why all this B.S. is happening. Trump 2024
Is overthrowing the Constitution he swore an oath to protect and defend a presidential act? No.
If Trump wins in 2024 America is finished. If you believe I am wrong then start reading books about how dictators serve one person only. Themselves.
Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Mussolini, Gaddafi, Saddam, and the list goes on.
The supreme court will end, no dictator has a court that is above them. Wait till the petulant child starts arresting all those who appose him. (His words not mine)
One day it will be a person you love. That is the day it will be to late. No more elections, because dictators end elections, and end constitutions. Period. (Trumps own words, I will suspend the constitution on day one. I will arrest all my political rivals). Just like Hitler did)
You want a dictatorship in America???? Are you nuts???? First thing he'll do, is take freedom of speech away, then voting rights, all the benefits you worked you entire life for, and only give you the type of news he wants you to hear, like at his rallies now........all these things are exactly how Putin rules Russia....if that's what you want....go to Russia to live!!!!!
Not if SCOTUS decides that the president is immune from prosecution. That means Biden could assasinate Trump and be 100% immune.
Your whole statement is the evidence supporting your first sentence. Thank you.
Marge Simpson’s chain smoking twin sisters Selma and Patty are now Supreme Court Lawyers?!?!🚬🚬😂😂
i have a really hard time to listen to this lawyer of trump his voice is scary
Except HUNTER,CLINTON'S, BIDEN, MYORKS, hmmm who els.
Obama .
They have no bearing in Trump’s criminal behavior. Trump, Clinton, and Mayorkas we’re all impeached but not convicted. Biden was not impeached. Hunter Biden was not a government official, therefore cannot be impeached. What’s your point?
Who is Myorks?
And who is els? Wtf
OMG DEVILS
Is trump's lawyer RFK?
Delay delay delay
Trump for 2024 from the U.K.🇺🇸🇬🇧
Totally agree, from New Zealand.
When did immunity become a thing???
Sounds like Sauer is doing a lot of manipulating of this particular statute.
Yet the current president cannot be prosecuted because of his poor memory…. Trump should just start forgetting shit
He is in mental decline.
@@douglemay7989🤣😂🤣😂
@@douglemay7989 Oh Trump is not. Does he still think he beat Obama in the 2016 election and Niki Hailey was in charge of the Captial police on Jan 6th.
@douglemay7989 yet he is still in office wandering around aimlessly in search of ice cream. PAUSE.
It sounds like RFK jr. is Trump's lawyer.
So the president could either be in jail, or in office. Nice choice.
I didn't think Bosley was still around
Supreme Court Compromised too??
Looks like it's ACB.
Not Clarence & Ginny.
Yes, it is. Clarence Thomas has received insane amounts of money from lawyers, also his friends, arguing before him in the Court.
he's gonna cite BORK?? a guy famous for being a bad pick for the Supreme Court?
Sounds like George C. Scott playing a lawyer.
When he says peacefully protest. That’s the end of the argument. If he said storm the capital and over turn this election. That’s different.
He even tried to get Pence to overturn the election results.
@les0101s that's not true. He wanted pence to do what was in his power as the vp to send the votes back to the electorates. This was a soft coup and the Jan 6 bullshit was used to end the session. Illegitimate people run our government. That's why the country is going to shit. There now you're up to speed.
@@les0101spence was supposed to send the senators fraud issues back to the states. Obviously after the election the democrats first order of business was to change the rules. Now the vice president can not do anything. Witch will bite them in the ass come November when they try and claim fraud. To bad, oh so sad.
That argument was made to discuss first amendment rights and presidential duties (eg, protesting instead of using presidential veo power was the hypothetical, which does not apply here, along with other official mechanisms to challenge election results that are part of his duties, which does apply)
The vice president counts the votes. He has legal authority to not do so.
If nobody wins the presidential election, then the house speaker (Nancy pelosi at the time) is sworn in.
Democrats only have stupid dishonest arguments.
What coup?
Ikr?? Are they trying to call the Fedsurrection a coup?
Try to keep up would ya. She is using it as an example of what a president could try to do if they were considered above the law. Why even comment if you don’t understand what is going on.
The one I saw on TV, live?
ACB is very intelligent and has an incredible memory.
If his career as a lawyer doesn't work out, dude could get a gig as a Dalek impersonator.
Amy Coney is always in the middle or lefty. Trump made a big mistake having this woman on the bench. Should have nominated the Cuban one.
Absolutely correct!!! So many on Supreme Court that should NOT BE!!! Totally unconstitutional!
I am worried about this Jezebel
Remember keep your friends close and your enemy closer and never tell the enemy your plan.
What difference does lefty or righty make? The only thing important is the Truth and the facts! Not lies, misinformation and any of the Supreme justices are supposed to be non- political! Not kiss assets!
A Supreme Court Justice is not supposed to be right, left or middle. They are supposed to interpret laws in the context of the Constitution. Justice Barrett appears to be doing *exactly* that. She is intelligent and articulate. The Democrats politicized the Supreme Court - that’s how we got Rowe vs. Wade and so many other wretched decisions.
Knowingly and willingly are not grounds for immunity
So I think Bush should be prosecuted as he knowingly and willingly lied to congress about Iraq
hussein should be prosecuted as he knowingly and willingly spied on Trump
Brandon should be prosecuted as he knowingly and willingly let the Illegal foreign invaders in this country
That’s Mitch McConnells tool.
What a crock
Having an impeachment before a president can be charged makes no sense.
What if the president takes out all of the senate and house. Then he can go free?
That is awesome!!!
That's a fake premise. You functionally just asked "what if fairies and unicorns took over the world," even though they don't exist and that isn't a real thing.
If the people approve of the president wiping out congress, then it is an act of the people. If the people disapprove, then the president can't do it in the first place and nobody would listen to him, this it isn't a real scenario.
Try and learn how our 3 branches of government work before commenting again please.