Getting to the, i want to return to absolute immunity of mark meadows filing, because i want to understand, when meadows and trump say absolute immunity, they re saying the law can t touch them. they can do what they want as president and chief of staff. i renata about this 25 years ago. this is a totally bogus theory. unfortunately for mark meadows, i have not been able to find the federal law or constitutional provision that makes in the very awful election part of the job at the white house. it is ridiculous. meadows was acting as some protector of election integrity. he was acting to protect his boss and tried to get the results don t out. and that way, he is similar to nixon s chief of staff. it s not just meadows. trump today was tweeting basically that he has absolute immunity according to some constitutional scholar, which is probably ridiculous.
The federal law or constitutional provision that makes in the very awful election part of the job at the white house. it is ridiculous. meadows was acting as some protector of election integrity. he was acting to protect his boss and tried to get the results don t out. and that way, he is similar to nixon s chief of staff. it s not just meadows. trump today was tweeting basically that he has absolute immunity according to some constitutional scholar, which is probably ridiculous. alone, for him to espouse this is disqualifying for the offense. dick about what they re saying. they re saying that joe biden and his chief of staff, jeff science, canter out the election next november and install themselves for a second term. it s ridiculous. yeah, they are saying that president biden and the white house chief of staff now can basically commit any crime they want. this really is the nixon