Live Breaking News & Updates on Framers

Stay informed with the latest breaking news from Framers on our comprehensive webpage. Get up-to-the-minute updates on local events, politics, business, entertainment, and more. Our dedicated team of journalists delivers timely and reliable news, ensuring you're always in the know. Discover firsthand accounts, expert analysis, and exclusive interviews, all in one convenient destination. Don't miss a beat — visit our webpage for real-time breaking news in Framers and stay connected to the pulse of your community

Ayman

>> could a president who ordered seal team six to assassinate a political rival, who was not impeached, would he be subject to criminal osution? >> if he were impatient and convicted first. >> so your answer is no? >> my answer is qualified yes. there is a political process that would have to occur under the constitution. >> the atlantic's david a grant coals what you just heard there, that clip, quote, perhaps the bullet assertion of any major american candidate has ever made. greg note and his, base that while the framers of the constitution may have assumed a president would be impeached and quickly convicted if he ordered an act of political murder, with the republican party, that what we are seeing, it is have to say that assumption no longer holds. the danger is not a political. if the courts agree with trump and decide that insurrection merits immunity, what could that empower that disgraced ex

President , Subject , Rival , Answer , Seal-team-six , Criminal-osution , Six , Quote , Process , Constitution , Atlantic , David-a

Ayman

argument to a whole new level. >> could a president who ordered seal team six to assassinate a political rival, who was not impeached, would he be subject to criminal prosecution? >> if he were impatient d convicted first. >> so your answer is no? >> my answer is qualified yes. there is a political process that would have to occur under the constitution. >> the atlantic's david a grant coals what you just heard there, that clip, quote, perhaps the bullet assertion of any major american candidate has ever made. greg note and his, base that while the framers of the constitution may have assumed a president would be impeached and quickly convicted if he ordered an act of political murder, with the republican party, that what we are seeing, it is have to say that assumption no longer holds. the danger is not a political. if the courts agree with trump and decide that insurrection merits immunity, what could that empower that disgraced ex president to do if he wins a second term? what kind of green light does

President , Argument , Level , Prosecution , Rival , Subject , Seal-team-six , Impatient-d , Six , Quote , Process , Constitution

The Last Word With Lawrence ODonnell

The Last Word With Lawrence ODonnell
vimarsana.com - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from vimarsana.com Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.

Faculty , Round , Colorado-supreme-court , Andrew-weissmann , Insurrection , Officer , Words , David-blight , Professor-foner , History-professor , Professor-blight , Club-table

The Last Word With Lawrence ODonnell

the turns the framers used for things like secrecy, energy, dispatch, vigor, implying that there are occasions when you need to have a -- and when you listen to trump's lawyers, the argument seems to be that they were making wise that if a president down the road is going to fear prosecution on the basis of the exercise of those powers and the -- energy and vigor that the constitution expects and -- you should not have to fear down the road that you're gonna be accountable for whatever missteps he makes. there is, however, the second aspect of this whole responsibility question, which i think the whole impeachment procedure, meaning a congressional proceeding, which decides whether or not the man should stay in office, and the legal proceedings, necessary based on the nature of the misbehavior he's committed. the corresponding value that was discussed than which i think we should still honor and

Donald-trump , Lawyers , Argument , Things , Vigor , Occasions , Energy , Framers , Secrecy , Dispatch , Prosecution , Road

The Last Word With Lawrence ODonnell

final round of the faculty club table with soft professor andrew weissmann and history professor's, david blight and eric foner. professor blight, how should the supreme court define the words officer and insurrection, if they feel they have to, in section three of the 14th amendment? >> well, if the president is not an officer of the united states, and then nobody. 's he's the only person in charge of the entire nation. and by the way, framers of the 14th amendment were worried about the possibility of jefferson davis coming back in as a presidential candidate. he was ruled out eventually, by the end of 1872, but they were worried about that. we can hope that the justices will read up on, maybe in eric 's book, is that the fall election after the passage of the 14th amendment became a referendum on the amendment, all across the north.

Andrew-weissmann , David-blight , History-professor , Faculty , Club-table , Round , Colorado-supreme-court , Insurrection , Officer , Section , 14th-amendment , Words

The Last Word With Lawrence ODonnell

explicit. there are two separate processes the suggest what we talked about this last week. those processes are quite distinct. weather not it's a good idea. to remain the sole holder of the executive power. the second deals with the real consequences down the road. and whether or not the second process should depend upon the prior process, which is quite distinct in terms of how it's conducted, in terms of expectations. it seems to me to be almost a no-brainer. so as i thought about this today, i tried to come up with the best argument that one might try to make on behalf of what seems to be the utterly absurd position that trump's lawyers as well as trump himself had been maintaining. i think he could to some extent the idea that we now call the -- of the presidency, a popular idea among conservative legal speakers. it is the the sole holding the president's older of executive power and justification for that that would've been made in 1707 when the idea of a single executive was adapted in the first constitutional convention, you want to encourage occasions where you need a strong power of command. the turns the framers used for

Idea , Executive-power , Road , Processes , Consequences , Weather , Holder , Deals , Two , One , Process , Terms

The ReidOut

witnesses start testifying, including his own vice president, who is going to testify against him, his lawyers that were in the white house are going to testify against him, that at that point, he is completely gone, and he's on the way to the big house. he knows that, and that's why he's trying to delay this as much as possible. >> mary, i have to, since you did work in the national security realm as a prosecutor, get your take and your response to mr. sauer's argument that a president could steal national security documents, check, could sell pardons, and could use seal team 6 to murder their political opponents or arguably any american they wanted or anyone they wanted, and not be subject to prosecution ever, ever, ever. >> i think that's fundamentally nothing that the framers could have ever expected or anticipated. it's true that a president does have substantial sort of leeway

Point , Way , Lawyers , Vice-president , White-house , The-big-house , Witnesses , John-sauer , Argument , Response , Paul-butler , Security

The ReidOut

you're conceding presidents can be prosecuted. he said specifically if they're impeached and convicted. judge pan, and isn't that also a concession that a president can be criminally prosecuted for an official act because presidents can be impeached for official acts. then he kind of went inalible. at the end, they got into a back and forth where he seemed to take all of that back and say, this case is too flawed. i didn't mean it. he didn't even stick by the idea he presented if convicted, they could be prosecuted. >> well, he's obviously a horrible lawyer, but it's a horrible argument. the argument they're trying to make is that a misreading of the constitution. the constitution says that a president can be impeached by the house of representatives, convicted by two-thirds in the senate and removed from office, but still can be prosecuted and tried and convicted and punished in criminal court. so it's very clear, the framers wanted to insist on the absolute

Donald-trump , Presidents , Pan , Isn-t , Act , Concession , Nixon-versus-fitzgerald-case , All , Acts , Back , Idea , The-end

The ReidOut

wbr id="wbr15600"/> the outer perimeter of his official duties. but a marked contrast to that, the supreme court rejected absolute immunity when nixon complying with the subpoena to provide tapes that he had, white house tapes, that had been subpoenaed as evidence in that criminal prosecution. what the report said there, and i'm going to look over here to read it exactly, is that neither the doctrine of separation of powers nor the need for confidentiality of high level communications without more can sustain an absolute unqualified presidential privilege of immunity from judicial process in all circumstances. so the court made this distinction, and the dramatic questions that judge pan asked today about ordering seal team 6 to murder a political opponent, i think, really illustrate why there can't possibly be that kind of immunity. it's nothing our framers would have ever expected. /b>

Supreme-court , Statory-immunity , Tapes , Duties , Perimeter , Subpoena , Contrast , Prosecution , Doctrine , Need , Powers , White-house

Trump Immunity Appeal

can a president be prosecuted without first being impeached and convicted? all of your other arguments to fall away, your separation of powers argument falls away, your policy arguments fall away if you concede that president can be criminally prosecuted under some circumstances. >> in article two of the investing clause [ inaudible ] article there lack of jurisdiction to examine in the presidential abilicts. >> but you conceded if impeached and convicted. >> and there is an exception to that in the impeachment judgment clause. so constitution does it in many situations where it engages in balancing. framers were most concerned about not the notion of the president would never be prosecuted of things of

President , Argument , Arguments , All , Powers , Separation , Being , Circumstances , Inaudible , Article , Policy-arguments , Investing-clause