Advertisement

Trump Gets Positive Vibes In Weeks After ‘Immunity’ Hearing

Advertisement

OPINION: This article may contain commentary which reflects the author's opinion.


A growing chorus of political analysts and experts believe that former President Donald Trump’s immunity hearing before the U.S. Supreme Court boded well for him.

Senior editor Ronald Brownstein’s article in The Atlantic, “Trump Is Getting What He Wants,” concludes that the former president is unlikely to be tried in federal courts before the November election, which he discussed in an interview with CNN.

“Political analyst Ron Brownstein’s new piece out in The Atlantic is about the Supreme Court‘s impact on Trump‘s future and the future of the presidency…let‘s start there. Ron, because after yesterday‘s Supreme Court arguments, you concluded that Trump is getting what he wants and more how and why,” asked host Kate Bolduan.

“Well, look in practical, your attorney in the near term, what he‘s getting is we‘re kind of getting numb to this, but that at that hearing yesterday, five of the Republican-appointed justices, really all of them except Amy Coney Barrett, gave very clear signals that they are going to protect the Republican presidential nominee from a trial before the November election on the charges that this poll and other polls show are the most serious is to the American people,” Brownstein claimed.

Advertisement

“I mean, in practical terms, at almost any of the rulings that seemed possible out of that hearing are going to make it extremely difficult, if not impossible, for there to be a trial on whether Trump tried to subvert the last election before he faces voters in the next election,” he continued.

“The implications for what happens if he is re-elected may be even more profound. I mean, you saw that hearing how virtually unlimited is their view of presidential power,” he went on. “His lawyers argued that unless he was first impeached and convicted, which is impossible in this current partisan environment, he could sell nuclear secrets, assassinate a political rival, or even stage a coup without facing criminal trials and the legal experts that I spoke with pointed out that when you‘re starting with someone who has that level of view of what he can do as president, trying to draw a very fine line between what can and can‘t be prosecuted after he leaves office is kind of a doomed effort.

He concluded: “He is going to take almost any kind of immunity as a license to truly push at the boundaries and read just a portion of because of that, you wrote this: those who went into the hearing wishing to preserve a pre-election trial against Trump emerge from the proceedings reduced to hoping that the court doesn‘t eviscerate the possibility of criminal consequences for any president who breaks the law.”

Advertisement

WATCH:

Earlier this year, Georgetown University law professor Jonathan Turley said Trump held the advantage after the nation’s highest court decided to take the case, and again, because that made it less likely he would have to sit for a trial over charges brought against him by special counsel Jack Smith over incidents that took place on Jan. 6, 2021.

Advertisement

“The real victory here for Trump deals with the calendar,” Turley told “Special Report” host Bret Baier. “You know, the overriding push of Smith, the special counsel, has been to get a trial before the election. He is running out of runway. If this opinion doesn’t come out until June, perhaps, you have to remember that even if Smith wins, the mandate goes back to the district court, which has to handle all the pre-trial motions. That could take months.”

“They didn’t great the stay, but they created an effective or constructive stay by setting it for argument,” Turley added.

Advertisement
Test your skills with this Quiz!