Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin

(107,985 posts)
Wed May 13, 2020, 06:29 PM May 2020

'We're asking for temporary presidential immunity,' Trump lawyer Jay Sekulow says

They'd said it before, but President Donald Trump's attorney put it more bluntly than ever:

"We're asking for temporary presidential immunity," Jay Sekulow told the Supreme Court Tuesday.

"Temporary presidential immunity," in the way the President's lawyers describe it, would mean that Trump (or whomever is president at the time) couldn't be investigated or prosecuted while holding the office of President. No subpoenas, no testimony, no indictments, if investigators sought those.

"Criminal process targeting the President" violates the Constitution, Sekulow said.

Justice Elena Kagan called out the argument, in which Sekulow was steadfast Tuesday.

"He's the President," Sekulow responded.

Kagan had a retort: "The President isn't above the law."

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/were-asking-for-temporary-presidential-immunity-trump-lawyer-jay-sekulow-says/ar-BB13ZqY4?li=BBnb7Kz

8 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
'We're asking for temporary presidential immunity,' Trump lawyer Jay Sekulow says (Original Post) Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin May 2020 OP
I've never understood why Barr's claim that the POTUS couldn't be investigated or prosecuted while.. Frustratedlady May 2020 #1
So in essence... 2naSalit May 2020 #2
I think white water, the Paula Jones lawsuite, etc already set the precedent Buckeyeblue May 2020 #3
So the Constitution must change wrt impeachment? intrepidity May 2020 #4
Reductio ad absurdum: What if a POTUS has his opponents whacked? Girard442 May 2020 #5
Sekulow has a spelling error, "president" is not spelled k-i-n-g. nt procon May 2020 #6
That's the crux of the argument, right there. Volaris May 2020 #8
Nah, he means "temporary" dawg day May 2020 #7

Frustratedlady

(16,254 posts)
1. I've never understood why Barr's claim that the POTUS couldn't be investigated or prosecuted while..
Wed May 13, 2020, 06:40 PM
May 2020

in office wasn't called out from the get-go. It seemed that everyone accepted that as fact and didn't argue the case. Maybe I missed it, but the Democrats should have at least called Barr on his interpretation.

2naSalit

(86,610 posts)
2. So in essence...
Wed May 13, 2020, 06:54 PM
May 2020

They are asking for SCOTUS to change the Constitution for something new that even they recognize doesn't really exist already though they are also arguing that it does.

Buckeyeblue

(5,499 posts)
3. I think white water, the Paula Jones lawsuite, etc already set the precedent
Wed May 13, 2020, 07:00 PM
May 2020

I'm on the fence about a sitting president being indicted.

intrepidity

(7,296 posts)
4. So the Constitution must change wrt impeachment?
Wed May 13, 2020, 07:05 PM
May 2020

Or, can only former presidents be impeached otherwise?

Or, can impeachment occur without an investigation?

That's the rabbit hole right there.

Girard442

(6,071 posts)
5. Reductio ad absurdum: What if a POTUS has his opponents whacked?
Wed May 13, 2020, 07:36 PM
May 2020

Don't say impeachment. How could anyone investigate to know if impeachment is warranted?

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»'We're asking for tempora...