“A President Who Sells Nuclear Secrets…”

Many of us have spoke about the extreme danger in providing a president - Republican or Democrat - with the type of immunity Trump is seeking but this summary really takes the cake. https://t.co/YTDby7vSYh pic.twitter.com/10OY5foJJ9

— Bradley P. Moss (@BradMossEsq) December 30, 2023

Not to mention raises some interesting questions:

Also: “a president who sells nuclear secrets to a foreign adversary”

Interesting choice of hypotheticals …. https://t.co/TJPY87MWb0

— George Conway (gtconway3 on Threads—try it!) (@gtconway3d) December 31, 2023

Interesting, indeed (Quasi-) legal Twitter will be all over the idea this is an “Easter egg” for the MAL case. When they finally get around to noticing this as an “Easter Egg.”

This is a lot more fun than that:

Smith slyly notes that Trump himself previously told the S Ct in a case where he sought (unsuccessfully) immunity from a state grand jury subpoena that he wd NOT be immune post-Presidency and wd not be thereafter "above the law." Trump v. Vance. https://t.co/O3uollB7u9

— Andrew Weissmann (weissmann11 on Threads)🌻 (@AWeissmann_) December 30, 2023

It’s not dispositive, but it does raise the question of which position is the real Trump position? The Courts won’t dispose of Trump in that statement, but it weakens his position almost to a nullity. Not that he had a strong position to begin with.

As expected Jack Smith cites the recent DC Circuit ruling in Blassingame and the 11th Circuit ruling in Meadows to argue, correctly, even if implied absolute presidential immunity exists for former presidents in criminal cases (which it doesn’t), the conduct here is not immune. pic.twitter.com/c418JnthAy

— Ben Meiselas (@meiselasb) December 30, 2023

That’s more likely the argument that wins the case. But anything you can do to undermine Trump’s position, is good for your side. (The Court may even take this as the “out” to sidestep the immunity question and simply toss Trump’s claims on their lack of merit. Either way is fine (Presidents do not earn a “Get Out Of Jail Free Card”), but the more deliberate way is to be preferred. It’s when the Supremes junk deliberation in favor of outcome (the modus operandi of the Roberts Court), that the judiciary goes to shit.)