To win his immunity case against Donald Trump, Jack Smith concocted nightmare scenarios of what the former president might do if immunity is upheld. Smith claims Trump’s request is a…wait for it..”a threat to democracy.”
“We’ll just read again from the filing because this could be right out of a political thriller, quote, the nation would have no recourse to deter a president from inciting his supporters during a State of the Union address to kill opposing lawmakers to ensure that he remains in office unlawfully.”
It should be noted that the former president isn’t asking for unlimited immunity. It’s a case-by-case situation. Trump requests immunity for his stump speech, perhaps other speeches, based on his free speech rights. Smith’s statements assume he was already convicted of trying to overturn an election illegally. Presidents have lied to get us into war and were granted immunity.
Mr. Trump believes the election was crooked, as does half the nation. He was pursuing his belief with lawyers and an interpretation of the Constitution the Left doesn’t like.
BREAKING: Jack Smith warns if Trump is re-elected he could use the State of the Union address to incite his supporters to kill opposing politicians pic.twitter.com/q0nrGYlbnw
— Jack Poso (@JackPosobiec) January 4, 2024
MSNBC gleefully promoted the bizarre scenarios Jack Smith came up with in the 82-page filing, including:
Ordering the National Guard to murder one’s critics, selling nuclear secrets to foreign adversaries, telling the FBI to plant evidence on political enemies, taking bribes for government contracts — these are all things presidents could do without criminal consequence if Donald Trump’s immunity argument is correct, special counsel Jack Smith told a federal appeals court in Washington.
This is a critical free speech case. But there is no way to know how the Supreme Court will rule in the end.
That’s because “in each of these scenarios, the President could assert that he was simply executing the laws; or communicating with the Department of Justice; or discharging his powers as Commander-in-Chief; or engaging in foreign diplomacy,” Smith’s team wrote to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on Saturday.
“The implications of the defendant’s broad immunity theory are sobering,” Smith’s team wrote, adding that Trump’s approach would leave “no recourse to deter a President from inciting his supporters during a State of the Union address to kill opposing lawmakers — thereby hamstringing any impeachment proceeding — to ensure that he remains in office unlawfully.”
There are many safeguards built in which Jack Smith left out.
A three-judge panel of that court will hear arguments on Jan. 9 on the former president’s immunity claim.