'So I'm a constitutional law professor,' Kate Shaw explained. 'I have never taught my students about the doctrine of the criminal immunity of ex-presidents from prosecution, even for official acts. And that’s for the simple reason that there is no such doctrine.” 

In my 50 yrs…

“I asked when she started paying attention to politics herself. ‘When Obama became president,’ she told me. ‘That’s when everything started changing.’

‘What bothered you about what was happening?’

‘Well, for one, I didn’t think he was an American.’” nytimes.com/2024/04/27/mag…

“When I asked the political historian Federico Finchelstein what he made of the speech, he replied bluntly: ‘This is how fascists campaign.’”

⁦Charles Homans⁩ in ⁦The New York Times⁩ nytimes.com/2024/04/27/mag…

Exactly, and the sky didn’t fall. Future Illinois Governors did not fail to govern. They did not stage a January 6 to avoid leaving office. In the many instances in which states have prosecuted former governors including for official acts, none of the parade of horribles followed

NEW: Our briefing covers the 4 takeaways from the unprecedented SCOTUS immunity hearing and why immunity wouldn’t just be an outrage — it’s a national security risk.

Subscribe for critical stories & complex issues beyond partisanship & campaign politics. ifyoucankeepit.org/p/a-tipping-po…

I was in the Oval Office with Trump when he said a WH staffer he believed leaked an embarrassing story about him should be executed.

We may want to take this line of argument from Trump’s attorney extremely seriously.

I am in shock that a lawyer stood in the U.S Supreme Court and said that a president could assassinate his political opponent and it would be immune as 'an official act.'

I am in despair that several Justices seemed to think this answer made perfect sense.

Donald Trump is not asking questions about limited immunity, or what he did in his personal or official capacity.

He wants absolute immunity. That's his argument. That's his demand. It's incompatible with our system of government as we know it.

But he wants the Republican…

“The Supreme Court may be inclined to split hairs, but Donald Trump is not,” Deana El-Mallawany, the counsel for the bipartisan group Protect Democracy, told me after the hearing. “The arguments today made clear that Trump seeks absolute unchecked power. Trying to rein in an…

Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor asks in the Trump immunity hearing: 'If the president decides that his rival is a corrupt person and he orders the military or orders someone to assassinate him, is that within his official acts that for which he can get immunity?'

Trump…

I asked Thomas Joscelyn, who wrote much of the 1/6 committee report, what sort of evidence Jack Smith likely gathered on Trump's conduct that the committee couldn't get.

Here are his answers. *This* is what a SCOTUS delay could keep hidden from voters.

newrepublic.com/article/180896…

Remember, Jonathan Karl reported that Jack Smith has secured testimony from top advisers to Trump who provided an 'extraordinarily detailed description' of what he was doing throughout the day as the mob rampaged.

The 1/6 committee COULD NOT GET THIS INFO.

newrepublic.com/article/180896…

Let's be clear: If SCOTUS helps Trump delay the 1/6 trial, voters will likely be making their choice in the next election without hearing any of the new evidence Jack Smith has gathered on Trump's conduct during the violent effort to overturn the last one.
newrepublic.com/article/180896…

Frog in boiling water alert:

Who could have imagined 8 years ago that in the Trump era the Supreme Court would be considering whether a president should be above the law for assassinating opponents or ordering a military coup and that *at least* four justices might agree.

Alito warns if former presidents can be prosecuted they might refuse to leave office peacefully.

But we know this is untrue from our laboratories of democracy, the states, where we have long prosecuted former governors without this happening. theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/…

Alito is indicting a criminal justice system when it comes to Trump that he defends when it comes to every other criminal defendant.

He’s such a bad faith actor.

For anyone not sufficiently worried about what a second Trump term would be like, his argument in the Supreme Court today should terrify you. He wants absolute unchecked power. That’s his view of the presidency. And he wants to make it so.

Now Trump’s lawyer is saying a president could order the military to stage a coup to keep him in power and could be immune from any future prosecution. This is INSANE.

Trump is putting in fancy legal arguments that the Supreme Court should grant him absolute power if reelected.

Wow. Not backing off. Trump’s lawyer just told the Supreme Court Trump could assassinate his opponent and would still be immune from prosecution.

Trump said he could shoot someone on 5th Ave and get away with it. Now he’s asking the Supreme Court to make that so. Not a drill.

'The political damage to Trump is not what is said in the courtroom; it’s how he looks. After spending his whole life and three presidential campaigns cultivating an image of power and strength, the first week of the trial made the former president look weak, tired, and scared.'…