Civil cases brought against former President Trump over the Capitol insurrection are testing a startling point: that Trump’s actions on Jan. 6 may fall under presidential immunity.
That’s funny. Everyone else is saying Mehta was very skeptical about complete civil immunity.
Would be nice if this article would list some of his questions, and the ridiculous TFG-lawyer answers.
Add to this the fact that TFG is being sued for acts he committed as CANDIDATE Trump, not president.
If our legal system allows for a President (republican) to engage in the incitement to violence and allows a President (republican) to overthrow the results of a legal and certified election we are well and truly screwed.
All persons, even republican presidents, are accountable to the rule of law or we are just another corrupt dictatorship.
Who was his audience?
That, in and of itself, defines the event as a campaign function.
There was no national presidential address; no attempt to call upon legitimate non-partisan experts. All the speakers were political allies immersed in a conspiracy to defraud the United States.
This is a no brainer. Seriously. Presidents are NOT kings.
Google search for “judge mehta immunity” yields these results on the first page:
So with that theory, a president could yell fire in a crowded theater and claim freedom of speech and addressing the public within his duties. Isn’t that in effect what he did on the Elipse?
It is only tricky if you want it to be tricky.
He was incouraging a riot, nothing less. Acting as President? Bull Shit.
It wasn’t “Tricky”. It was a “Massive Attack”.
FACT: The Orange Perversity doesn’t respect ANY boundary.
For me it would also include the signage. Did the podium that Trump spoke behind have the official presidential seal of the US, did it have campaign signage, did the other speakers before him make up Republicans and Democrats?
I think we could also look at the setting, the Ellipse. We’re used to seeing POTUS speak from the Oval Office, a hallway within the White House, the Rose Garden. but has a POTUS ever given an official speech from the Ellipse?
Then there’s the who was the host? Was it the US Government, or a private group?
It was Karmacoma.
The question, in Judge Mehta’s mind appears to be "Does everything a president do while president constitute an official “presidential act?”
If he’s campaigning?
If he’s boffing a porn-star?
If he’s cheating on his taxes?
Can any crime be considered a presidential act?
Mehta seems to be leaning hard into a big FAT “NO!!!”
“So you’ve got a statue that says both, if you engage in a conspiracy to interfere with the duties of a federal officer, and you’re in a position to prevent it, you could be held liable,”
I’m not sure we should rely on speaking statues
If nothing else he tested the boundaries of impropriety, not to mention morality…
DFG was not ‘presidential’ for even 30 seconds during his four years of squatting in the White House.
But it’s not so simple as we might like.
Can see any opening given in a decision become the basis to sue Biden the next time he speaks up to, say, encourage covid vaccines.
You know it’ll happen.
This isn’t quite so murky…
Trump has been doing this since the day he learned to talk.
Bring it
