for another day, and decide here there s just no question. the attorneys for trump argued something different after the, during the second impeachment after the insurrection. i want to play youou some of w t was said in court. there is a quote in the congressional record, in which your council, i m sorry your client said through council, no former officeholder is immune from the destination and prosecution. investigation is what well, that may be true but as to the principal officer, the president, he is immune unless he is impeached and convicted. and again it comes back to. but he was the president at the time, and his position was that no former officeholder is immune. and in fact, the argument was there is no need to vote for an impeachment, because we have this backstop, this criminal prosecution, and it seems that many senators relied on that, to voting to acquit. it i mean look, it, i was chief of staff 100 years ago, right. in the clinton administration, dur
court of appeals today. and what s more, in a remarkable exchange with one of them, judge florence pan he conceded that the principle would apply even if a president ordered a hit on a political opponent. i asked you, yes or no, a yes or no question. could a president who ordered seal team six to assassinate a political rival, who was not impeached, could he be subject to criminal prosecution? if he were impeached and convicted first, hands down. so your answer is? yes. well that s the kind of thought experiment judges often pose to probe the limits of an argument before them. rarely do they get such a breathtaking answer. according to our elie honig, who we will hear from in a minute. the exchange prompted james pierce, the attorney representing special counsel jack smith to ask, quote, what kind of world are we living in? if that hypothetical holds true. for his part, the former president suggested that losing his case would create, quote, bedlam in the country. what he w
it s what they live to do. trinet serves small and medium sized businesses. so they can do more of what matters. benefits. payroll. compliance. trinet. people matter. oh y to two, three , one , two , three , one , two days ago at twenty five year old man stlled connor sturgeon open fire in a bank in louisville. ur kentucky. sturgeon shot 13 people. he murdered five of them beforee police took him down. today, sturgeon s parents t a statement sayingnosed their son had a diagnosedme mental illness and had been receivin g treatment from a psychiatrist. sturgeons parents offered n o details about any of this. and as far as we know, they were never asked. but we wouldke t like to ask, ww drugs was connor sturgeonr st taking when he committed mass murder? it seems like a relevantvant question. it s certainly more relevantcirc than the endless circular debate over guuler gn control ts
but let me tell you something.tr while i may be the committee of this committeeeshmancongress, fr of congress, that s going toand change very soon. the in january . and there will be a big, big how difference in how we conductk, e congress and how we hold people accountable. so i have t, ito ask the locl police.t do it soundj,s like they re on your side and i believe that. but do fj, since you re a feder. officeholder, would be investigating this do jwithout routinely gets people s textte messages directly from apple without telling g them like this,d ou pretty sophisticated in their ability to find out everee thing that takes place electronically. but they have no clue who sj doing this. departu rethe biden justice dep, is that what you re saying? that s right. departmen texat of juss said the departmee justice and the fbi, the same folks that are able to to find n the grandmothers that posted pictures of themselves at the capitol on january 6th. goig the same people, right aft.at
particular day? below and i would ask- that is particular day? below and i would ask. that is the particular day? below and i would ask. that is the question | ask. fairpoint. that is the question i would ask. fairpoint. that is the question i would ask- ask. fairpoint. that is the question i would ask. annabel? ask. fairpoint. that is the question i would ask. annabel? to - ask. fairpoint. that is the question i would ask. annabel? to the - ask. fairpoint. that is the question i would ask. annabel? to the law. i would ask. annabel? to the law itself, it i would ask. annabel? to the law itself. it was i would ask. annabel? to the law itself, it was quite i would ask. annabel? to the law itself, it was quite loosely - itself, it was quite loosely draughted, and it was going to be open draughted, and it was going to be open to draughted, and it was going to be open to exploitation. i am not saying open to exploitation. i am not saying people who made these claim