0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
FBC
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
we saw one of the supreme court this week where the court was skeptical about the ability of jack smith to bring some of these charges, they been stretched to such a limit the question is law. whether or not the people who really are interfering in the election are those bringing suit for the sole purpose of tearing down the private opponent in a campaign potentially even jailing him prior to the election so they can keep our. >> these court cases against trump are all out will assault connected to the biden white house to stop the political rival trump. the courts to knock out and gager opponent. let's not america. >> it's just a real problem. we are used to hearing other countries do things like this. the fact that we have so many in the press corps right now on this situation because there's a short term thinking going on in my was one of the things that was so important the supreme court talked about this week, the person arguing on behalf of jack smith wanted to talk about the specifics of this case and suggested is one time figure will never deal with this again and the court want
we saw one of the supreme court this week where the court was skeptical about the ability of jack smith to bring some of these charges, they been stretched to such a limit the question is law. whether or not the people who really are interfering in the election are those bringing suit for the sole purpose of tearing down the private opponent in a campaign potentially even jailing him prior to the election so they can keep our. >> these court cases against trump are all out will assault...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
CSPAN
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
so at best, jack smith is left with come if the ruling goes as expected, the difficult task of delineating and pretending that while this step he took as president was political and personal but it wasn't official. i don't see how you take the 208 and a separate the two issues as personal and presidential -- how you take and a separate the two issues as presidential and personal. host: do you think you should get immunity? guest: the constitution is set up where the president has prerogatives as chief executive and that means he is not subjected to scrutiny by the courts for those in office. host: justice kagan said that the founders did but the immunity clause in the constitution and they meant not to because we would've gotten rid of the king. guest: i guess the response to that would be immunity flows from the constitution that he has prerogatives as president of the united states, the executive power resides in him. who can check him beyond the processes envisioned in the constitution, which specifically is impeachment. host: we are taking calls for tom fitton, president of judicial wa
so at best, jack smith is left with come if the ruling goes as expected, the difficult task of delineating and pretending that while this step he took as president was political and personal but it wasn't official. i don't see how you take the 208 and a separate the two issues as personal and presidential -- how you take and a separate the two issues as presidential and personal. host: do you think you should get immunity? guest: the constitution is set up where the president has prerogatives...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
FOXNEWSW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
jack smith wants one before the election. >> dana: david spunt in washington, d.c. for us. thank you so much. joining us for more on all this is attorney will sharp. he is on the legal team representing former president trump before the u.s. supreme court and a candidate for missouri attorney general. thank you for making time for us today. david axelrod was a campaign consultant and worked in the white house for obama. he now has a big podcast and tweeted this yesterday. based oh than what we heard today from scotus it may seem trump may skate past the election without standing trial on the january 6th charges. if so the new york city trial is likely the only he will face pre-november. under the circumstances the best scenario he could have hoped for. how do you see it? >> we were certainly optimistic coming out of the supreme court yesterday. they seem to be taking this issue of presidential immunity, the scope of presidential immunity, very seriously and they seemed very receptive to our arguments without a robust presidential immunity for a president's official acts in
jack smith wants one before the election. >> dana: david spunt in washington, d.c. for us. thank you so much. joining us for more on all this is attorney will sharp. he is on the legal team representing former president trump before the u.s. supreme court and a candidate for missouri attorney general. thank you for making time for us today. david axelrod was a campaign consultant and worked in the white house for obama. he now has a big podcast and tweeted this yesterday. based oh than...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
KNTV
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
. >> jack smith brought conspiracy and obstruction charges against mr. trump last year, but the case has been dogged down in appeals, telling the justices that the former president's actions would lead to dark consequences. >> his novel theory would immunize presidents for bribery, treason, sedition, murder and here conspireing to use fraud to overturn the results of an election. >> the ultimate result in the case likely turning on the line between actions taken for personal gain and a president's official duties. >> if you don't have immunity, you are not going to do anything. you are going to become a ceremonial president. you are not going to take any of the risks, both good and bad. >> none of this stopping mr. trump's current trial in manhattan. tabloid mogul david pecker expected back on the stand today after telling the jury thursday how his company purchased the story of karen mcdougal. another woman that alleged an affair with mr. trump before the election, admitting i wanted to protect my company, i wanted to protect myself and i wanted also to
. >> jack smith brought conspiracy and obstruction charges against mr. trump last year, but the case has been dogged down in appeals, telling the justices that the former president's actions would lead to dark consequences. >> his novel theory would immunize presidents for bribery, treason, sedition, murder and here conspireing to use fraud to overturn the results of an election. >> the ultimate result in the case likely turning on the line between actions taken for personal...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
KPIX
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
the decision by the way is likely to have huge implications on special counsel jack smith's election interference case against donald trump as well as in year's presidential race. >>> newly returned from china, san francisco mayor london breed now on the stump for votes in san francisco. she wants to keep her job and is making the case to voters at the neighborhood level. she's got some major opposition you see here. several high-profile challengers. campaigning on promises of change. each touting their own solutions to the city's problems from crime to the housing crisis. the candidates are all deploying a strategy and that is to get into neighborhoods to have face-to-face conversations and wilson walker went along with mayor breed who is doing the same. this time at san bruno avenue in the portola district. >> oh my goodness. you -- leon, you got my grandmothers out here in the cold. >> reporter: in a blustery afternoon wind, mayor london breed hit san bruno avenue, going door-to-door along a business corridor with a large chinese population in a sure sign that the campaign and han
the decision by the way is likely to have huge implications on special counsel jack smith's election interference case against donald trump as well as in year's presidential race. >>> newly returned from china, san francisco mayor london breed now on the stump for votes in san francisco. she wants to keep her job and is making the case to voters at the neighborhood level. she's got some major opposition you see here. several high-profile challengers. campaigning on promises of change....
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
FOXNEWSW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
jack smith in the courtroom and all justices went back and forth with two extreme positions. former president's legal team says he has immunity and special counsel says he has none. what it seemed like justices are trying to get to is middle ground, presidents need some level of immunity so they can make difficult decisions, but not efverything he ever did woud be covered. they are trying to find middle ground. as jonathan turley and colleagues have said, i get the sense they send it to a lower court to deal with again, that turns into a net win for trump legal team. they'll have that private vote today. we won't know for a while. >> guy: we were talking on the guy benson show. plug there. what does that mean for the timeline? that is crucial here. >> shannon: yeah, if that would happen, they would have to pick and choose through what are private acts, what were official acts he did as president, not as a candidate or person. as the president. that is going to take some time before you get back to the trial on the merits. one question yesterday, i think from justice barrett,
jack smith in the courtroom and all justices went back and forth with two extreme positions. former president's legal team says he has immunity and special counsel says he has none. what it seemed like justices are trying to get to is middle ground, presidents need some level of immunity so they can make difficult decisions, but not efverything he ever did woud be covered. they are trying to find middle ground. as jonathan turley and colleagues have said, i get the sense they send it to a lower...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
KGO
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
lawyers for special counsel jack smith argue no president is above the law. here's abc news reporter jay o'brien. >> this morning, the supreme court weighing former president trump's unprecedented claim. absolute presidential immunity. the argument the president can never face criminal prosecution for anything they do in office linked to their official duties without presidential immunity from criminal prosecution, there can be no presidency as we know it. the claim central to trump's defense in the january 6th case, brought by special counsel jack smith. trump asserting many of the election interference efforts smith alleges were official acts. liberal justices not buying the argument. >> the framers did not put an immunity clause into the constitution. wasn't the whole point that the president was not a monarch and the president was not supposed to be above the law. >> responding to justice sotomayor, trump's attorney, arguing a president assassinating a political rival they view as corrupt could even qualify as an official act and not be subject to crimina
lawyers for special counsel jack smith argue no president is above the law. here's abc news reporter jay o'brien. >> this morning, the supreme court weighing former president trump's unprecedented claim. absolute presidential immunity. the argument the president can never face criminal prosecution for anything they do in office linked to their official duties without presidential immunity from criminal prosecution, there can be no presidency as we know it. the claim central to trump's...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
CSPAN
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 4
so at best, jack smith is left with come if the ruling goes as expected, the difficult task of delineating and pretending that while this step he took as president was political and personal but it wasn't official. i don't see how you take the 208 and a separate the two issues as personal and presidential -- how you take and a separate the two issues as presidential and personal. host: do you think you should get immunity? guest: the constitution is set up where the president has prerogatives as chief executive and that means he is not subjected to scrutiny by the courts for those in office. host: justice kagan said that the founders did but the immunity clause in the constitution and they meant not to because we would've gotten rid of the king. guest: i guess the response to that would be immunity flows from the constitution that he has prerogatives as president of the united states, the executive power resides in him. who can check him beyond the processes envisioned in the constitution, which specifically is impeachment. host: we are taking calls for tom fitton, president of judicial wa
so at best, jack smith is left with come if the ruling goes as expected, the difficult task of delineating and pretending that while this step he took as president was political and personal but it wasn't official. i don't see how you take the 208 and a separate the two issues as personal and presidential -- how you take and a separate the two issues as presidential and personal. host: do you think you should get immunity? guest: the constitution is set up where the president has prerogatives...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
jack smith can say, i'll pare this down and include only the crimes that are private acts. or as the lawyer for the solicitor general -- or for the special counsel said yesterday, thinking of donald trump in his role as office holder versus office seeker. there are a lot of acts here as office seeker where i think he could say, fine, even if -- you know, we'll litigate these issues another day, but i'm ready to go to trial on just these issues relating to his private acts. if that's the case, i think that this case could go to trial before the election. >> that's interesting. we'll keep an eye on that. jen, as you know, the trump team has always felt a delay is a win for them with the theory of the case being, if they can push all of this stuff back with delay, delay, delay, past election day, he gets himself re-elected, makes it all go away. on the other side of that, though, as you also know very well, talking to people around the biden campaign, they are not counting on these cases to save them. they are running a campaign to win. they do believe that his sitting in cour
jack smith can say, i'll pare this down and include only the crimes that are private acts. or as the lawyer for the solicitor general -- or for the special counsel said yesterday, thinking of donald trump in his role as office holder versus office seeker. there are a lot of acts here as office seeker where i think he could say, fine, even if -- you know, we'll litigate these issues another day, but i'm ready to go to trial on just these issues relating to his private acts. if that's the case, i...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
CNNW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
but that said they couldn't have done this in december when jack smith asked them to and they didn't. >> well, what would it off? what i think they should do here? something that is, they won't do this. i'm afraid, but they could say, look we're not going to decide whether the official acts of the president are subject to criminal prosecution. but we'll leave that for another time. what we're going to tell you is overthrowing the overthrowing election. it's not an official act and make a factual finding and it says, as they did in bush versus gore, which embarrassing versus them, but where they, they said look, someone has to do this. we'll do it, we'll say what the president did here are the former president. these are, these are crimes, these are clearly crimes. these, this is a coup. and now he can be prosecuted for those things when we are saying that legal question, we postpone the factual question, we decide here and now it doesn't seem like it, sir, what did you see yesterday? >> every time we find ourselves at a new junction on this particular issue, i become deeply enraged be
but that said they couldn't have done this in december when jack smith asked them to and they didn't. >> well, what would it off? what i think they should do here? something that is, they won't do this. i'm afraid, but they could say, look we're not going to decide whether the official acts of the president are subject to criminal prosecution. but we'll leave that for another time. what we're going to tell you is overthrowing the overthrowing election. it's not an official act and make a...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
CNNW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
smith the greenlight entirely to pursue these charges related to trump's actions on and around january six, the high court appears likely to leave a lot of the work to lower courts that could take months and further delay a trial that was originally set for march 4, we are also hours from trump returning to new york city courtroom for his hush money trial. >> the former tabloid publisher david pecker, back on the stand yesterday, describing to jurors how he paid a former playboy playmate to keep her quiet about an alleged affair with trump and how his decision not to pay for stormy daniels story led to michael cohen ultimately paying for it. judge juan merchan also announcing he'd hold a hearing next wednesday where he's going to make a decision about whether trump violated his gag order. that supposed to be an off day for the trial after court wrapped up yesterday, trump seemed to walk back his vow to testify in his hush money trial well, if it's necessary right now, i don't know if you heard about today. >> today, was just incredible. people are saying the experts, i'm talking about
smith the greenlight entirely to pursue these charges related to trump's actions on and around january six, the high court appears likely to leave a lot of the work to lower courts that could take months and further delay a trial that was originally set for march 4, we are also hours from trump returning to new york city courtroom for his hush money trial. >> the former tabloid publisher david pecker, back on the stand yesterday, describing to jurors how he paid a former playboy playmate...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
FOXNEWSW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
the take was oral argument was disaster for special counsel jack smith. at least 5-quart republican seemed eager to o the very leasg to permit trump to delay, criminal trial adding the trust does seem to hedged the mostme john roberts also seem toec think that trump enjoys some immunity from federal prosecution. a little bit about the argued cases and clerk for is justice scalia and thomas. chris, is the real reason for the left to be in despair tonight customer >> i think it was a good day for former president trump info t i supreme court court, laura. but i think that is because he's got the law and common sense on his side. i i mean, this is -- the questiont edas you just read is whether aa president can bevi subjected toh criminal liability after leavine office for official acts, right? nobody is arguing here about the president's being immune for private acts.th so, murder, speeding, whatever. but the thing is, if we crossedn the rubicon of saying that our presidents can bche criminallyon charged with for their official acts, we don't h have a countr
the take was oral argument was disaster for special counsel jack smith. at least 5-quart republican seemed eager to o the very leasg to permit trump to delay, criminal trial adding the trust does seem to hedged the mostme john roberts also seem toec think that trump enjoys some immunity from federal prosecution. a little bit about the argued cases and clerk for is justice scalia and thomas. chris, is the real reason for the left to be in despair tonight customer >> i think it was a good...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
CSPAN
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
smith needed anyone to make thoas arguments it was going to be mike dreeben. >> was jack smith there today? >> he was at the counsel table today. >> you said some justices appeared open to this idea, the argument being made by the former president's legal team. which justices? >> there were a few, actually. two of trump's own appointees seemed more receptive to the arguments than perhaps anyone else on the court. particularly justice brett kavanaugh was very concerned about the idea of letting criminal prosecutions go forward over actions taken by the president. he continually floated this idea, this rule that would say that unless a statute ecifically mentions the president, that then it can't be applied against hem. that is a slight variation on the whole question of immunity but it would get their via a different rout and would essentially mean the end of jack smith's case. neil gorsuch moated the possibility of this situation, he said would lead to just every president pardoning themselves on the way out of office which is a novel and kind of dangerous situation for the court to
smith needed anyone to make thoas arguments it was going to be mike dreeben. >> was jack smith there today? >> he was at the counsel table today. >> you said some justices appeared open to this idea, the argument being made by the former president's legal team. which justices? >> there were a few, actually. two of trump's own appointees seemed more receptive to the arguments than perhaps anyone else on the court. particularly justice brett kavanaugh was very concerned...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
he represents special counsel jack smith. putting that out there bribery, treason, sedition, murder, and here conspiring to use fraud to overturn the results of an election and perpetuate himself in power. this is the entire ball game. it's not something you can slice in half and come up with a tidier way that keeps you out of the politics -- >> if you're someone who studied the 2025 project, the platform for a second term term, there is no separation at the policy level between trump, the private person who would act, and trump the wannabe resident again in his official acts. they are together officially and publicly. when he ran the first time, to unearth what he really wanted to do with the border. it was a scoop and leak that led to the store we know about and covered the part to do illegal things at the border. it's in a document and you can keyword search it and the official and private acts of the second term agenda. what they do doesn't just matter in terms of the first-ever file and transfer of power in america havin
he represents special counsel jack smith. putting that out there bribery, treason, sedition, murder, and here conspiring to use fraud to overturn the results of an election and perpetuate himself in power. this is the entire ball game. it's not something you can slice in half and come up with a tidier way that keeps you out of the politics -- >> if you're someone who studied the 2025 project, the platform for a second term term, there is no separation at the policy level between trump,...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
FOXNEWSW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
i don't think anybody has thought of so far that jack smith could do. i don't want to put any idea i sat in his head because i hate this prosecution. prosecution r. fai i think it's unconstitutional and i think it's wrong. bu would be interestingsee to see if jack smith triedifsm to take that concessioitn and rn with it. i don't know what the courts would do. macoi'm sure, if i would have me that concession. but with all thade that said, m, either you agree that this case now no chance of being triede of wefore november, or at least is that your take? we only have about 10 seconds each. grean secot yeah, i just think to's impossible to get this done. it's inevitable that the supreme court, regardles gets of their precise decision, they got to send it back to thee lower court for findings of fact. at the very leas t by the trial court judge and professor. there's a current indictment. it can't put under the current indictment the cur, can't be trd before the election. but if they amended the indictment to include only the conceded thd publiceitu private
i don't think anybody has thought of so far that jack smith could do. i don't want to put any idea i sat in his head because i hate this prosecution. prosecution r. fai i think it's unconstitutional and i think it's wrong. bu would be interestingsee to see if jack smith triedifsm to take that concessioitn and rn with it. i don't know what the courts would do. macoi'm sure, if i would have me that concession. but with all thade that said, m, either you agree that this case now no chance of being...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
CNNW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
and drinking tonight jack smith's case against trump in major jeopardy. the supreme court signaling they will talk about this. the justice signal that they want the lower court to sort through one by one which of trump's actions were official duties and which were private before making a decision on immunity. they want this specific. this coming as it appears justices will ultimately reject trump's attempt to throw out the case of absolute immunity. >> my question is whether the very robust form of immunity that you are advocating is really necessary. >> i'm trying to under stand what the incentive is for turning the oval office into the seat of criminal activity in this country. >> they di d not put a clause in the constitution but wasn't the whole point that the president was not a monarch and was not supposed to be above the law. >> they're not buying the immunity argument but they're not looking like they will move quickly on it and move the january 6 case forward either. >> evan, i think that is the confusing things.. it is clear how they view it and
and drinking tonight jack smith's case against trump in major jeopardy. the supreme court signaling they will talk about this. the justice signal that they want the lower court to sort through one by one which of trump's actions were official duties and which were private before making a decision on immunity. they want this specific. this coming as it appears justices will ultimately reject trump's attempt to throw out the case of absolute immunity. >> my question is whether the very...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
the legitimacy of the appointment of jack smith. that is not even before the court. and thomas asked about that. he remain it is most mysterious on the court today. we don't know what he thought. >> i think his jenny was showing. when you work for a president, you know these are just guys and girls and these particular guys consume all of this. and what was clear today, they will direct quote segments from all of these programs. alito gives speeches in front of conservatives and i'm sure conservatives in the audience who don't watch our programs are like what is he talking about. they are bound to trump in their feelings of being persecuted. they found common cause with the feeling of persecution. what is amazing to me as a nonlawyer is a federal judge carter out in california was like the further we get, the murmur key it gets but in the immediate aftermath, trump clearly committed the crimes and federal judges said more likely than not he committed felonies. him and that eastman guy. the further we get, the the more the people of the highest levels, the court held.
the legitimacy of the appointment of jack smith. that is not even before the court. and thomas asked about that. he remain it is most mysterious on the court today. we don't know what he thought. >> i think his jenny was showing. when you work for a president, you know these are just guys and girls and these particular guys consume all of this. and what was clear today, they will direct quote segments from all of these programs. alito gives speeches in front of conservatives and i'm sure...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
CNNW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
smith's indictment are indeed private good x what led to the change from your team? >> well, i think we've always conceded, first of all, that there is no presidential immunity for president's private acts in office. i think we've also conceded that obviously president trump engaged in many private acts during the time period in question. i thought in many respects the much more damning concession, if you could call what we did a concession at all? oh was michael dreeben essentially admitting the attorney for the special counsel's office essentially
smith's indictment are indeed private good x what led to the change from your team? >> well, i think we've always conceded, first of all, that there is no presidential immunity for president's private acts in office. i think we've also conceded that obviously president trump engaged in many private acts during the time period in question. i thought in many respects the much more damning concession, if you could call what we did a concession at all? oh was michael dreeben essentially...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
BBCNEWS
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
but jack smith, the special counsel who is, of course, prosecuting donald trump for his attempts to overturn the 2020 election and the events around january the sixth and the attack on the capitol, he says no—one is above the law, and that's what the justices have been wrestling with. they, i think, were pretty sceptical of the idea of total immunity from prosecution. now, that may be bad news for donald trump, but they also may want to make a kind of distinction between acts done as a private citizen or for private reasons, and acts done as official as part of the officialjob. and that may mean they push this back down to the lower courts, which could delay the case even further. and we're already looking at a very tight timetable forjack smith, the special counsel, to bring this case before the election. donald trump himself was not in washington — he was in a courtroom in new york, where the first ever criminal trial of a us president is under way, and he addressed the supreme court case. the us supreme court had a monumental hearing on immunity and the immunity having to do with the
but jack smith, the special counsel who is, of course, prosecuting donald trump for his attempts to overturn the 2020 election and the events around january the sixth and the attack on the capitol, he says no—one is above the law, and that's what the justices have been wrestling with. they, i think, were pretty sceptical of the idea of total immunity from prosecution. now, that may be bad news for donald trump, but they also may want to make a kind of distinction between acts done as a...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
FOXNEWSW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
smith has an option and i wonder if yes thought about it he could actually achieve what he wants to achieve , as sleazy as i think it is trying to mainly get a down and dirty conviction before the election if he did the following, a fee tomorrow had the grand jury reindict donald trump only charging private acts not acts that are immunized trump's own lawyer acknowledged publicly on the record that it would be constitutional permissible to indict and try a president for private acts and of the indictment as it exists today is a combination of jumble really of private acts and public acts so jack smith would probably have the option of going back and getting a new indictment and thereby moving the supreme court decision by simply taking the position that trump's lawyer made and using it as the basis for prosecuting he may lose that case obviously because i don't know whether there is enough in the private act to warrant a criminal prosecution but that is an option that i know i don't think he knew else has thought of so far that jack smith could do i don't want to put any ideas in hi
smith has an option and i wonder if yes thought about it he could actually achieve what he wants to achieve , as sleazy as i think it is trying to mainly get a down and dirty conviction before the election if he did the following, a fee tomorrow had the grand jury reindict donald trump only charging private acts not acts that are immunized trump's own lawyer acknowledged publicly on the record that it would be constitutional permissible to indict and try a president for private acts and of the...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
CNNW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
this was jack smith with a very receptive court trying to push for something that makes no sense. speedy trial, right. is entirely or 99% designed to protect a defendant, particularly incarcerated defendant, from sitting and rotting in prison. and then eventually being acquitted. so this idea that they had to have done was pretty shamelessly political. and i think that's why the supreme court bristled when jack smith said less expedited, i don't think they care about i have this whole conversation months ago. well, they don't care about the political timeline that jack created. and so on. and so what i'm saying is the realistic ending of this case, if the majority holds with how oral argument went is that they're gonna be returning all of these cases where immunity is in play to fact-finding lower courts, which will then have litigation like he had with police shootings about whether it's in the course of employment. and then they're probably going to march right back up to the supreme court and say, how about this is not the last appeal to go all the way up without question. >> w
this was jack smith with a very receptive court trying to push for something that makes no sense. speedy trial, right. is entirely or 99% designed to protect a defendant, particularly incarcerated defendant, from sitting and rotting in prison. and then eventually being acquitted. so this idea that they had to have done was pretty shamelessly political. and i think that's why the supreme court bristled when jack smith said less expedited, i don't think they care about i have this whole...
16
16
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
KQED
tv
eye 16
favorite 0
quote 0
smith for attempting to overthrow the results of the 2020 election. john yang is here now in studio with more. >> amna, it was a big day for former president trump in a number of courts -- in addition to the nearly three hours of oral arguments in his immunity case at the supreme court, a grand jury in arizona indicted several of his closest allies, for allegedly trying to subvert the 2020 election. following all of this is the “newshour's” william brangham, and our supreme court analyst marcia coyle. they were both at the supreme court this morning. remind us the basics. what is president's argument and the response? >> very simply, president trump is asking the court to say that a former president has absolute immunity for conduct involving his or her official acts, and that that immunity stretches all the way to the outer perimeter of his office. and he's looking to certain clauses in the constitution and certain precedents to bolster that argument, but the government is saying basically there is no immunity clause in the constitution. it does
smith for attempting to overthrow the results of the 2020 election. john yang is here now in studio with more. >> amna, it was a big day for former president trump in a number of courts -- in addition to the nearly three hours of oral arguments in his immunity case at the supreme court, a grand jury in arizona indicted several of his closest allies, for allegedly trying to subvert the 2020 election. following all of this is the “newshour's” william brangham, and our supreme court...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
KQED
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
jack smith, the special counsel prosecuting donald trump for his attempt to overturn the 2020 election and the events around january 6, the attack on the capital, he said no one is above the law. that is what the justices have been working with. they i think were skeptical of the idea of total immunity from prosecution. that may be bad news for donald they also made a distention between acts done as a private citizen for private reasons and acts done as official, as a part of the official job. that may mean they will push this back down to the lower courts, which could delay the case even further. we are already looking at a very tight timetable for jack smith the special counsel to bring this case before the election. of course, we also know, don't we, if donald trump were to win november's election, in this case still hanging over him, he could simply ask the justice department to drop it. caitriona: gary at the u.s. supreme court and manhattan, thank you both for joining us. with me now and studio is marcus childress, the former investigative council for the congressional committee
jack smith, the special counsel prosecuting donald trump for his attempt to overturn the 2020 election and the events around january 6, the attack on the capital, he said no one is above the law. that is what the justices have been working with. they i think were skeptical of the idea of total immunity from prosecution. that may be bad news for donald they also made a distention between acts done as a private citizen for private reasons and acts done as official, as a part of the official job....
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
KQED
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
and certainly not on the timeframe that jack smith wants. there is a lot of interesting questions raised by the court here on both sides of the aisle. they have a lot to sort through and muddle through, really, given the lack of caselaw law they have to rely on. and it is very likely that they send this back down for some clarification and some of these points regarding the prosecution. christian: this issue of whether acts were committed uer official duties, it is an important point. you can see why the supreme court wants to get this right. if you back to the case of george w. bush at the -- at the time of the iraq invasion, he went into iraq without a u.n. resolution, there were some people who wanted to bring a prosecution against him on crimes of aggression. it would be limiting for a president, if there was not immunity, for some acts that were carried out within official duties. sara yeah, that's right. trump's team raises some legitimate points here, legitimate arguments about essentially stunting the ability of the president to do t
and certainly not on the timeframe that jack smith wants. there is a lot of interesting questions raised by the court here on both sides of the aisle. they have a lot to sort through and muddle through, really, given the lack of caselaw law they have to rely on. and it is very likely that they send this back down for some clarification and some of these points regarding the prosecution. christian: this issue of whether acts were committed uer official duties, it is an important point. you can...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
the prosecutor jack smith and justice department was grilled for nearly twice that amount of time. but almost immediately at the start of proceedings, under questioning, we got confirmation that the appeals court hypothetical, that crazy hypothetical about trump being able to assassinate political enemies and never be charged, we got confirmation at the start that that was not a fluke. president trump maintains and his lawyers maintain that he really is immune from prosecution, specifically for killing his political rivals. >> i'm going to give you a chance to say if you stay by it. if the president decides that his rival is a corrupt person and he orders the military or order someone to assassinate him, is that within his official acts from which he can get immunity? >> it would depend on the hypothetical, but we could see that could be an official act. >> it could and why? >> that could be an official act, really? you might officially as part of his duties want to kill his domestic political rival and if it is an official act, trump's lawyers say he is immune from prosecution. in
the prosecutor jack smith and justice department was grilled for nearly twice that amount of time. but almost immediately at the start of proceedings, under questioning, we got confirmation that the appeals court hypothetical, that crazy hypothetical about trump being able to assassinate political enemies and never be charged, we got confirmation at the start that that was not a fluke. president trump maintains and his lawyers maintain that he really is immune from prosecution, specifically for...
0
0.0
Apr 26, 2024
04/24
by
BBCNEWS
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
but jack smith, the special counsel who is, of course, prosecuting donald trump for his attempts to overturn the 2020 election and the events around january 6 and the attack on the capitol. he says no—one is above the law, and that's what the justices have been wrestling with. they, i think, were pretty sceptical of the idea of total immunity from prosecution. now, that may be bad news for donald trump, but they also may want to make a kind of distinction between acts done as a private citizen or for private reasons, and acts done as official as part of the officialjob. and that may mean they push this back down to the lower courts, which could delay the case even further. and we're already looking at a very tight timetable forjack smith, the special counsel, to bring this case before the election. 0ur north america correspondent nada tawfik has been covering trump's hush—money trial. we are still on the first witness in this case, the publisher of the national enquirer, and he gave more details into these payments that he said he made on behalf of donald trump through his lawyer, michae
but jack smith, the special counsel who is, of course, prosecuting donald trump for his attempts to overturn the 2020 election and the events around january 6 and the attack on the capitol. he says no—one is above the law, and that's what the justices have been wrestling with. they, i think, were pretty sceptical of the idea of total immunity from prosecution. now, that may be bad news for donald trump, but they also may want to make a kind of distinction between acts done as a private...
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
FOXNEWSW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
disaster for the special counsel jack smith. at least five of the court's republicans seemed eager at the very least to trump delay federal criminal trial adding that the justice who seemed to hedge the most, john roberts, also seemed to think that trump enjoys at least some immunity from criminal prosecution joining us now. chris landau. chris, is there real reason for the left to be in despair tonight? >> i think it was a good day for former president trump in the supreme court, laura. but i think that's just because he's got the law and common sense on his side. i mean, this is -- the question as you just read is whether a president can be subjected to criminal liability after leaving office for official acts, right? nobody is arguing here about the president's being immune for private acts. right? so, you know, murder, speeding, whatever. the thing is, if we cross the rubicon of saying that our presidents can be criminally charged for their official acts, we don't have a country anymore. i mean, how is a president -- how is
disaster for the special counsel jack smith. at least five of the court's republicans seemed eager at the very least to trump delay federal criminal trial adding that the justice who seemed to hedge the most, john roberts, also seemed to think that trump enjoys at least some immunity from criminal prosecution joining us now. chris landau. chris, is there real reason for the left to be in despair tonight? >> i think it was a good day for former president trump in the supreme court, laura....
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
. >> that kills both of jack smith's cases at once. >> that certainly kills -- aileen cannon is already killing the document case. she doesn't need extra help. >> professor, how do you think they're going to write it? it seemed like they were hinging a lot on this on official acts versus unofficial acts. even amy coney barrett tried to get them explain how fake electors is an official act. how are they going to write it? >> there for three distinctions that were salient. there was criminal versus civil because there is already broad civil immunity. then i think there was this official versus private acts, and then finally, there was sitting versus former president distinction. all of them, i think you're right, the one they're going to loft up is the official versus private. i think they'll do something similar to the case a couple years ago where they remanded it, and it seemed like a slam against trump, but ultimately, it gave him infinite amounts of time. i think it's going to be some kind of four-part test for how to distinguish between official and private acts. you didn't consider
. >> that kills both of jack smith's cases at once. >> that certainly kills -- aileen cannon is already killing the document case. she doesn't need extra help. >> professor, how do you think they're going to write it? it seemed like they were hinging a lot on this on official acts versus unofficial acts. even amy coney barrett tried to get them explain how fake electors is an official act. how are they going to write it? >> there for three distinctions that were salient....
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
CNNW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
smith's case against him. the court there appears poised to give trump what he wants, which is another delay in that trial. we're gonna have more on that breaking news coming up with the former trump white house attorney ty cobb. but first kara scannell, outside the courthouse in manhattan, and kara, you and i spent a lot of time together today in lower manhattan. what do you expect when packer good? it's back on the stand tomorrow under cross-examination trump's lawyers had about one hour of cross-examination with david pecker. and in that time, david pecker acknowledged that it was standard operating procedure for media companies to work with politicians but he also testified that he was at the heart of these deals and that he was involved with them and had many conversations with michael cohen, david pecker, serving as a narrator for the prosecution, taking the jury inside three of these catch-and-kill deals and testifying repeatedly that he was involved with them and help broker them to help donald trump's
smith's case against him. the court there appears poised to give trump what he wants, which is another delay in that trial. we're gonna have more on that breaking news coming up with the former trump white house attorney ty cobb. but first kara scannell, outside the courthouse in manhattan, and kara, you and i spent a lot of time together today in lower manhattan. what do you expect when packer good? it's back on the stand tomorrow under cross-examination trump's lawyers had about one hour of...
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
CNNW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
but the justices seemed so convinced that limiting the scope of what jack smith could actually try here, that they walked away feeling pretty good about it, even though there were some really remarkable moment comments in there, is paul just pointed out where his attorneys were making big concessions that we've never heard them make. >> a good point. it's interesting, elliot, that the court seemed prepare prepared to hand trump a delay and to move this case back to a lower court right now, that would be a win for trump, presumably because he wants to delay as much as possible. it would be a practical when not illegal win, right? it's there are not, there's not a majority of the supreme court that is going to rule that the foreign president is absolutely immune from criminal lawsuit. the criminal prosecution that's clear. now, they may send it and it seemed likely that there's a majority of the court wants to send it back down to lower courts for more litigation. the hearings that's a win for donald trump. it delays the trial. now, the supreme court can say that what we did the instituti
but the justices seemed so convinced that limiting the scope of what jack smith could actually try here, that they walked away feeling pretty good about it, even though there were some really remarkable moment comments in there, is paul just pointed out where his attorneys were making big concessions that we've never heard them make. >> a good point. it's interesting, elliot, that the court seemed prepare prepared to hand trump a delay and to move this case back to a lower court right...
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
FOXNEWSW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
but, many of the justices were as concerned about the sweeping implications of what jack smith is arguing as they were what donald trump was arguing and there seems to be an interest in finding a third option. but that third option would require likely a remand and a further delay of that case. >> gillian: we kept hearing today from the dissent that -- excuse me from the prosecution that, you know, there is in common understanding that presidents are subject to criminal liability. take a listen to that side of today. >> it's baked into the constitution that any president knows that they are exposed to potential criminal prosecution. it's common ground that all former presidents have known that they could be indicted and convicted and watergate cemented that understanding. >> so, what place do you think this so-called common understanding has in the law and in this case specifically? >> well, it's not quite as clear as what the did. two nixon cases one granted absolute immunity on civil cases. and the court has never answered to what extent that extends to criminal cases. there is also the
but, many of the justices were as concerned about the sweeping implications of what jack smith is arguing as they were what donald trump was arguing and there seems to be an interest in finding a third option. but that third option would require likely a remand and a further delay of that case. >> gillian: we kept hearing today from the dissent that -- excuse me from the prosecution that, you know, there is in common understanding that presidents are subject to criminal liability. take a...
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
CNNW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
i don't know if you remember, but jack smith, the special counsel, tried to get the court to intervene before the dc circuit back in december. the court said no. then when the court set this for argument that gave it two month window for it, now would probably wait another two months for a decision. the justices seemed somewhat divided today. i think it's really unlikely we would see a decision before the end of june, beginning of july, and that decision is likely going to split the baby it's going to result in a remand where there's going to be more work for the lower courts to do. i would be very surprised let' see donald trump go to trial before the november election at this point all right. >> ucla law professor rick hansen. thank you so much. good to see you. we'll be right back saving for, retirement was tough enough and navigating markets can be challenging at times. i understand that's why if fisher investments, we keep a disciplined approach with your portfolio helping you through the markets sen. downs, what about communication? we check in regularly to keep you informed whic
i don't know if you remember, but jack smith, the special counsel, tried to get the court to intervene before the dc circuit back in december. the court said no. then when the court set this for argument that gave it two month window for it, now would probably wait another two months for a decision. the justices seemed somewhat divided today. i think it's really unlikely we would see a decision before the end of june, beginning of july, and that decision is likely going to split the baby it's...
50
50
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
FOXNEWSW
tv
eye 50
favorite 0
quote 1
right former president donald trump was not in the courtroom but jack smith was. the entire council team as well. you look like it is related to january 6th and today the argument was the allegations they make about the actions he took surrounding generally sixth are they subject to some kind of broad grant of presidential immunity against potential criminal liability? the justices had all kinds of quarries looking far beyond the case and thinking about how it would impact generations to come. at 1 point saying we are writing a rule for the ages, they get the historical impact on the job they will have to do with this particular case. worrying in a contentious election cycle the person who loses would immediately have to worry about their opponent tried to put them in jail if they're an incumbent who lost a reelection bid. but just as jackson was on the other side saying i'm worried about the court getting a sweeping grant of criminal immunity to any sitting president so that when he leaves he knows there is not going to be a liability. this is what she responsibl
right former president donald trump was not in the courtroom but jack smith was. the entire council team as well. you look like it is related to january 6th and today the argument was the allegations they make about the actions he took surrounding generally sixth are they subject to some kind of broad grant of presidential immunity against potential criminal liability? the justices had all kinds of quarries looking far beyond the case and thinking about how it would impact generations to come....
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
BBCNEWS
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
the attorney for special counsel jack smith, who is prosecuting the attempts to overturn the election, pushed back against claims that donald trump's efforts amounted to "official acts" as president, but the chiefjustice did push back, reminding the special counsel how easy it is for a prosecutor to get a grand jury to bring an indictment. relying on the good faith of the prosecutor may not be enough in some cases, he said. we will talk about events in new york shortly. our correspondent nada tawfik will bring us up to date on the hush money case and the evidence we have been hearing today, but let's focus on the supreme court. gary o'donoghue has been carrying that angle for us. gary, as we have set out, the justices appeared sceptical of his claim of absolute immunity, but there is a question that needs to be answered, do the allegations in the indictment fall under official acts of the presidency or not? why is that relevant?— of the presidency or not? why is that relevant? because there is a distinction being _ that relevant? because there is a distinction being drawn _ that rel
the attorney for special counsel jack smith, who is prosecuting the attempts to overturn the election, pushed back against claims that donald trump's efforts amounted to "official acts" as president, but the chiefjustice did push back, reminding the special counsel how easy it is for a prosecutor to get a grand jury to bring an indictment. relying on the good faith of the prosecutor may not be enough in some cases, he said. we will talk about events in new york shortly. our...
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
CNNW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
and so boris brought him in to represent himself in the jack smith investigation. then he expanded his role to also cover these other cases and cod has an obvious affinity and loyalty to boris one that people like myself in jim trusty did not have so tim, i want to ask you at some of the evidence coming in now pecker is david pecker is of course, on the stand. >> at this moment, but there was something earlier that happened right before the lunch break. there was a text message between dylan howard, the editor in chief of the national enquirer, and what they describe as essentially a first-degree family member, i guess an immediate family member now, i'm going to tell you what the text says, but right now the defense raise an objection, so it's unclear whether this tax will be allowed to be shown to the jury. the discussion about it happened with the jury was not in the room. but the text is very significant, perhaps him it dylan howard texts, this family member, quote, of trump, at least if he wins, i'll be pardoned four election fraud. again, dylan howard, the ed
and so boris brought him in to represent himself in the jack smith investigation. then he expanded his role to also cover these other cases and cod has an obvious affinity and loyalty to boris one that people like myself in jim trusty did not have so tim, i want to ask you at some of the evidence coming in now pecker is david pecker is of course, on the stand. >> at this moment, but there was something earlier that happened right before the lunch break. there was a text message between...
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
smith's efforts to hold trump accountable for january 6th. i saw the five conservative justices repeatedly minimizing what occurred on january 6th right across the street from me, suggesting that the real threat here was the biden administration setting this terrible example of prosecuting a former president. brett kavanaugh, sam alito and clarence thomas think it's unconstitutional. brett kavanaugh sounded outraged at its very existence, and that left the four women justices to clean up the mess with the great hypothetical you just played, some really searching questions from justice barrett about the line that trump's attorney was trying to draw here, but they are just four votes and at the end of the day, i think there are clearly at least five votes to prevent this trial from moving forward anytime soon. >> so, carol, part of the arguments today center on what is an official act, what is a not official act, what is core to the presidency, and what is not core to the presidency. in your coverage of january 6th, the lead up to january 6th a
smith's efforts to hold trump accountable for january 6th. i saw the five conservative justices repeatedly minimizing what occurred on january 6th right across the street from me, suggesting that the real threat here was the biden administration setting this terrible example of prosecuting a former president. brett kavanaugh, sam alito and clarence thomas think it's unconstitutional. brett kavanaugh sounded outraged at its very existence, and that left the four women justices to clean up the...
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
FOXNEWSW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
. >> here he is questioning the internal representative special counsel, jack smith. >> does the president have immunity or are you saying there is no immunity or presidential immunity even for official acts? >> yes justice thomas but it is also important to put in perspective the position that we are offering the court today. the president as the head of the article to branch can assert as applied article two objections to criminal laws that it interfere with an official power presented by the president or prevents the president from accomplishing his constitutionally assigned functions. >> the clock is ticking. end of june we should hear something, it could be sooner. here is? >> harris: all right. there are protesters everywhere these days. david, thank you very much. so, kayleigh mceany, you and i got into a detailed conversation this idea of official acts versus private acts. let's bring the audience into our conversation on that. >> kayleigh: this was huge and this is a press of what we've heard if i'm trump and i watch this, i feel good about what i've learned. about these justices,
. >> here he is questioning the internal representative special counsel, jack smith. >> does the president have immunity or are you saying there is no immunity or presidential immunity even for official acts? >> yes justice thomas but it is also important to put in perspective the position that we are offering the court today. the president as the head of the article to branch can assert as applied article two objections to criminal laws that it interfere with an official...
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
FOXNEWSW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
smith case. does it go away, go forward, or a combination of the two which starts things from square one again and makes things a bit more complicated and delays it until after the election? >> dana: earlier today i asked and he mccarthy a political question. this is about presidents and presidential immunity but election year. if you are the biden white house and biden campaign how do you think they look at this and how do they want the justices to rule? >> i think they would want the justices to rule that the former president was acting not in his official capacity but as an office seeker. but two things. one is first of all, to some degree this has already been a victory for donald trump because this has delayed the start of the trial by jack smith and as a result has put him in the middle of a political campaign. we have a highly divisive electorate, highly divided with republicans on one side, democrats on the other cheering for their respective squads and as a result, it has energized presi
smith case. does it go away, go forward, or a combination of the two which starts things from square one again and makes things a bit more complicated and delays it until after the election? >> dana: earlier today i asked and he mccarthy a political question. this is about presidents and presidential immunity but election year. if you are the biden white house and biden campaign how do you think they look at this and how do they want the justices to rule? >> i think they would want...
0
0.0
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
smith today. and then dining room was on sealed. charging donald j trump, with conspiring to defraud the united states, conspiring to disenfranchise voters state, conspiring and attempting to obstruct an official proceedings. but trump legal team argues who should be protected by presidential immunity. the claim, many legal experts are skeptical about he doesn't have any text in the constitution to rely on, and that's significant because the constitution does grant and unity explicitly to members of the legislature. but it doesn't mention the president, according to his lawyers from who is acting within his official responsibility was president when he ledger lead tried to overturn the results of the 2020 election. they say no president and us history was ever prosecuted for his official act. and neither should, from what the case goes beyond, followed from if the supreme court ruled that the president doesn't have immunity from prosecution, many fear it could open the door to criminal behavior an
smith today. and then dining room was on sealed. charging donald j trump, with conspiring to defraud the united states, conspiring to disenfranchise voters state, conspiring and attempting to obstruct an official proceedings. but trump legal team argues who should be protected by presidential immunity. the claim, many legal experts are skeptical about he doesn't have any text in the constitution to rely on, and that's significant because the constitution does grant and unity explicitly to...
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
so what of course obviously jack smith and special counsel is hoping for, a majority of the court will just say, no, absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for a former president and clearly jack smith would say this is private acts. >> everybody stay with us. the arguments are just getting underway. let's listen in to the u.s. supreme court. >> without presidential immunity from criminal prosecution, there can be no presidency as we know it. for 234 years of american history, no president was ever prosecuted for his official acts. the framers of our constitution viewed an energetic executive as essential to securing liberty. if a president can be charged, put on trial, and imprisoned for his most controversial decisions as soon as he leaves office, that looming threat will distort the president's decision-making precisely when bold and fearless action is most needed. every current president will face de facto blackmail and extortion by his political rivals, while he is still in office. the implications of the court's decision here extend far beyond the facts of this case. could p
so what of course obviously jack smith and special counsel is hoping for, a majority of the court will just say, no, absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for a former president and clearly jack smith would say this is private acts. >> everybody stay with us. the arguments are just getting underway. let's listen in to the u.s. supreme court. >> without presidential immunity from criminal prosecution, there can be no presidency as we know it. for 234 years of american history,...
54
54
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
FOXNEWSW
tv
eye 54
favorite 0
quote 1
he put himself on that team to go after trump and now on the jack smith and arguing the case for jack smith today. very interesting. >> dana: we are going to have a chance at 10:00 a.m. to hear the justices and the argument. you will be inside. so you know the justices well and pay attention to a lot of this. what are you listening for today? is there anyone in particular you are expecting to weigh in heavily? >> you know i'll be keeping an eye on the chief justice. he tries to guide the court with a narrow hand in many cases, incrementally. if they find there is some scope of immunity for these particular actions where do they set the boundaries? i think listening to the questions about whether they are open to that issue of immunity and how far it might go. if we see who is trying to probe what the outer boundaries of that would be, these arguments are set for an hour but nothing else on the docket today. i expect we go well beyond that. this is a moment in history for the justices to decide. we don't know what the vote was to take up the case, who voted yes or no or who wants to he
he put himself on that team to go after trump and now on the jack smith and arguing the case for jack smith today. very interesting. >> dana: we are going to have a chance at 10:00 a.m. to hear the justices and the argument. you will be inside. so you know the justices well and pay attention to a lot of this. what are you listening for today? is there anyone in particular you are expecting to weigh in heavily? >> you know i'll be keeping an eye on the chief justice. he tries to...
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
CNNW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 1
this is what jack smith and the government says it is. then future presidents are going to be chilled. they're not gonna be able to make decisions as bold and fearlessly as we've seen, presidents do for the last over 200 years and she kinda reversed that questioning, tim, i want to listen to that moment because there's a few hours ago what just this is katon to brown jackson had to ask to trump's attorney if someone with those kinds of powers, the most powerful person in the world with the greatest amount of authority could go into office knowing that there would be no potential penalty for committing crimes i'm trying to understand what the disincentive is from turning the oval office into the sea heat of criminal activity in this country. if the potential for criminal liability is taken off the table, wouldn't there be a significant risk that future presidents would be emboldened? to commit crimes with abandon while they're in office i mean, that is really reversing their argument basically turning it on its head. yeah, exactly. and it
this is what jack smith and the government says it is. then future presidents are going to be chilled. they're not gonna be able to make decisions as bold and fearlessly as we've seen, presidents do for the last over 200 years and she kinda reversed that questioning, tim, i want to listen to that moment because there's a few hours ago what just this is katon to brown jackson had to ask to trump's attorney if someone with those kinds of powers, the most powerful person in the world with the...
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
CNNW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
both donald trump & jack smith, their lawyers point to history the constitution, both saying that it works in their favor for donald trump's side. he says separation of powers. the idea that the three branches are independent of each other means that judges cannot sit in judgment of the former president, whereas jack smith are used that there was never any kind of criminal immunity foreseen by the framers of the constitution. any points to a more modern day precedent? that involves former president richard nixon, who was forced out of office in 1974 because of his actions during the watergate scandal and his own effort to try to ensure his reelection back in 1972 but in 1974, after he was forced out, then president gerald ford pardoned richard nixon. and that pardon jack smith argues, was a recognition that nixon could have been subject to criminal prosecution if he had not been pardoned. so those are the dueling arguments the justices will hear. but bottom line, this trial of donald trump in this particular case has already been postponed since its original march start date because
both donald trump & jack smith, their lawyers point to history the constitution, both saying that it works in their favor for donald trump's side. he says separation of powers. the idea that the three branches are independent of each other means that judges cannot sit in judgment of the former president, whereas jack smith are used that there was never any kind of criminal immunity foreseen by the framers of the constitution. any points to a more modern day precedent? that involves former...
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
KGO
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
. >> today's arguments stem from special prosecutor jack smith's criminal charges against trump of crimes related to his effort to overturn his 2020 election loss. trump argues he can't be prosecuted, claiming those actions were taken as president. >> the fact that the supreme court is even entertaining, that there's questions there is deeply troubling. >> a three judge panel previously struck down trump's immunity claims, saying a president should not have unbound authority to commit crimes, giving the example of assassinating a political rival. this, says the former president, faces three other criminal cases. >> the various cases pending against donald trump, in which he's raised the question of criminal immunity. the january 6th case, the mar-a-lago case and the georgia case. because for all of those, for at least part of the time he was president. >> meantime, in arizona, a grand jury appears to have indicted seven attorneys or aides affiliated with trump over alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election in that state. they include rudy giuliani, mark meadows, attorney john eastman,
. >> today's arguments stem from special prosecutor jack smith's criminal charges against trump of crimes related to his effort to overturn his 2020 election loss. trump argues he can't be prosecuted, claiming those actions were taken as president. >> the fact that the supreme court is even entertaining, that there's questions there is deeply troubling. >> a three judge panel previously struck down trump's immunity claims, saying a president should not have unbound authority...
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
KPIX
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
the high court's decision would determine whether or not special counsel jack smith can move forward with his case charging trump with scheming to overturn the 2020 presidential election results which trump denies. >> never recognized this sort of immunity from criminal prosecution that trump is requesting. so i think it's a pretty uphill battle for the trump side. >> reporter: if the court rules against the former president's immunity claims, his election interference trial could possibly start before the election this november. though the court could also decide to send the case back to the lower courts. legal experts say that would also add even more delays to the proceedings. >> the supreme court understands that time is of the essence here and that all sides and the public all want a prompt decision, whatever that may be. >> reporter: the supreme court's decision is expected to come by early july. the justices have multiple paths to decide this case. and how quickly the court moves today following the arguments ultimately depends on whether the justices agree on a decision. anne
the high court's decision would determine whether or not special counsel jack smith can move forward with his case charging trump with scheming to overturn the 2020 presidential election results which trump denies. >> never recognized this sort of immunity from criminal prosecution that trump is requesting. so i think it's a pretty uphill battle for the trump side. >> reporter: if the court rules against the former president's immunity claims, his election interference trial could...
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
CNNW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
again, that's bad for jack smith. timeline. so if you're the former president, all you so we're looking for here is no bold action by the court. you don't want a decisive, sweeping decision that said the immunity. you want something either in the middle, four, four victory. i don't think any serious legal scholars think the court is going to come out and adopt an absolute immunity framework. but there is a real risk that they're going to do something in the middle at all. that's going to have this case dragging on. & you look at the timeline, will under so far the court has not moved quickly here. they have not act like this case is truly an emergency. so i don't suspect they're going to do so with their decision. >> even though a lot of it has gone under the label of expedited and emergencies but i guess those are all relative terms when it comes to the supreme as you guys well know, elliott, let's turn to arizona really quickly. is this indictment that happened overnight? is this the two-point version of georgia with the bigg
again, that's bad for jack smith. timeline. so if you're the former president, all you so we're looking for here is no bold action by the court. you don't want a decisive, sweeping decision that said the immunity. you want something either in the middle, four, four victory. i don't think any serious legal scholars think the court is going to come out and adopt an absolute immunity framework. but there is a real risk that they're going to do something in the middle at all. that's going to have...
0
0.0
Apr 25, 2024
04/24
by
FOXNEWSW
tv
eye 0
favorite 0
quote 0
special counsel jack smith says trump's behavior continued after he left office. and he should be prosecuted full stop. this case was supposed to go to trial in early march. but it was delayed when the supreme court agreed to hear the case. now, arguing for the special counsel today, a man named michael dreefn, he previously worked on special counsel robert mueller's team. he is screen left. screen right is john sour. former law clerk to the late justice antonin scalia. the justices they say that they are probably going to take this case for about two hours today though it could go longer given the stakes here. if they rule in trump's favor. his case in washington, d.c. could essentially go away. if they rule against him, the motions, everything will start moving again the train will start moving for trial. several months away. we may see a trial late summer, early falls, who knows if that could be delayed further, perhaps, past the election. back to you. >> brian: big media presence there already? >> big media presence barely anybody from the public. little surpr
special counsel jack smith says trump's behavior continued after he left office. and he should be prosecuted full stop. this case was supposed to go to trial in early march. but it was delayed when the supreme court agreed to hear the case. now, arguing for the special counsel today, a man named michael dreefn, he previously worked on special counsel robert mueller's team. he is screen left. screen right is john sour. former law clerk to the late justice antonin scalia. the justices they say...