Live Breaking News & Updates on Pan fried impossible gyoza
Stay updated with breaking news from Pan fried impossible gyoza. Get real-time updates on events, politics, business, and more. Visit us for reliable news and exclusive interviews.
case about his attempts to overturn the 2020 election. >> i did nothing wrong. absolutely nothing wrong. i didn't feel that as president you have to have immunity. >> the republican front runner running or watching on as court as his lawyer john sauer in courage the judge to break new legal ground, emphasizing everything he did was took place while he was still in the white house. >> winning in every poems being prosecuted by the administration that you seem to. replace >> one justice department argues nothing in the constitution supports shielding mr. trump from prosecution now. >> never before has there been allegations that a sitting president has, with private individuals, and using the levers of power, sought to fundamentally subvert the democratic republic and the electoral system. it would be awfully scary if there weren't some sort of mechanism by which to reach that criminally. >> judge florence pan, a biden
judge pan's mind for a second. when fee pierced the trump argument in a way that will make it impossible for any judge, including trump appointed judges on the supreme court, to rule that the president united states has complete immunity from any crimes committed while president unless that president is convicted in a senate impeachment trial for those crimes. >> can a president order seal team six to assassinate a political rival? that's an official act. an order to seal team six? >> he would have to be and would speedily be impeached and convicted before the criminal prosecution. >> but if he weren't, there would be no criminal prosecution or criminal liability for that? >> chief justice's opinion -- and our constitution in plain language of the impeachment judgment clause all clearly presuppose that what the founders were concerned about was not -- >> i asked you a yes or no
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
but -- convicted in an impeachment proceeding by the senate. >> well, the short answer is what they were doing there was taking a bad argument, the immunity argument, and conflating it with another bed argument. something based upon the impeachment judgment clause and mixing them all together in hopes of getting a stronger argument. and what happened was the trump attorney set a tread for himself, that judge pant just completely closed off. it was an intellectual tort before us by judge pan. and not only did she harlot the extreme nature of the position that a president might not be prosecutable for assassinating political rivals, she did something else. his attempt to explain, well you could hold the president liable, was based upon that clause any misread it by saying that if you can prosecute a former president if they were convicted by the senate. well the problem was, that is
it was that in many ways what judge pan was doing was saying to donald trump's lawyer, i want you to state publicly, for the record, what it is that the former president of the united states is claiming. the reason they were so and this was so visceral and everyone is leading with this quote where she is pressing on, this is not because it's a point that's buried. it's to say, this is actually what you are saying, and there wasn't a single one of the three judges that was buying it. there was almost no questioning about it because this idea of the impeachment first, that this is a prerequisite, has never been the law. no one thinks it's the law. as glenn said, it makes no sense. and so judge pan, i thought, was just such a great strategy in terms of both the law and also for the american public because this was livestreamed.
is impeached and convicted by the united states senate, in a proceeding that reflects widespread political consensus. >> you see, it's a shell game. congress impeach is trump for trying to overturn an election, and his lawyers say, no, this is a job for the criminal justice system. the criminal justice system charges trump and his lawyers say, no, this is a job for congress and the impeachment process. at one point, judge florence pan tested that theory with a hypothetical for the history books. >> could a president who ordered seal team six to assassinate a political rival, who was not impeached, could he be subject to cr prosecution? >> if he were impeached and convicted first. >> so, your answer is no. >> my answer is qualified yes, there's a political process that would have to occur under the structure of our constitution, which were require impeachment and conviction at the senate. >> trump's lawyer actually
the united states from taiwan. they lived in the same city as trump when florence pan was born in new york city. she graduated summa cum laude from the same college donald trump graduated from, the university of pennsylvania. she was immediately hired by goldman sachs, leading investment bank in the world, but after a couple of years she decided that spending your life chasing money like donald trump was no way to live. and so she went to stanford law school. then she served as a law clerk for a federal judge in the southern district of new york who was appointed by republican president ronald reagan. she then worked for the justice department, the department of treasury, president biden chose florence pan to occupy the seat in the washington, d. c. circuit court of appeals that was vacated by ketanji brown jackson when she moved up to the supreme court. donald trump believes that pan
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>
julie, the sort of headline here, the clips you played. and the headline comes from a hypothetical that appears in jack smith's own briefs, which is to say the argument that trump and his lawyers are making proves too much, obviously goes to fire. it cannot be the case. under the constitution and under the rule of law, in a democracy and such as ours, it would allow it to be possible to order seal team six to assassinate a political rival and not face a continent villa but for some impeachment and conviction. >> cannot be, that is the headline, all three judges will reject that proposition. basically after judge pan asked that hypothetical team six, long trump was a dead man walking. he should moves he should lose. legally, historically, logically, et cetera. so in that sense there is the
for allegedly authorizing drone strikes targeting u.s. citizens located abroad? >> here to crack open that pandora's box and examine the examples the trump team and also the judges offered up today is university of virginia law professor and expert on presidential power psi krishnaprakash. thank you so much for being here, professor, because this is what you know inside and out. it is presidential power. and so just this question of yes, it's a hypothetical and yes, it was provocative about the seal team 6 order that the judge raised, but i do think it gets to a good point, which is what is the limit? how far does presidential immunity go here? >> well, it's great to be with you here tonight. the constitution itself doesn't con fehr any express immunities on the president with respect to criminal prosecution or otherwise. nonetheless, the supreme court has recognized a immunity from damage actions that arise out of the president's official acts.