the country, including a former president, was the subject of a hearing today in a federal courthouse in washington, d.c. attorneys for donald trump and federal prosecutors argued over trump s claim that the federal election case against him should be dismissed because everything he did in the postelection period was in his official capacity as president. the three-judge panel that is hearing the case appeared spectacle of that claim. the ex-president and jack smith were in the courtroom today. trump has been claiming that president joe biden has been forcing him to appear in court, which is not true, he did have no obligation to appear at today s hearing. trump s attorney argued that allowing the prosecution of donald trump would, quote, open a pandora s box, but the judge has pushed back on that and many of the arguments he was making. trump s lawyer also argued that the president could only be prosecuted if he was impeached and convicted by the senate first, no matter what
16 Republican AGs threaten Maine over protections for trans care and abortion yahoo.com - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from yahoo.com Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.
a lot of heavy lifting in that sentence, i don t think they should accept it for review because there s no open constitutional principle here. there s no legal support for what we heard john sauer argue today. there s no legal support, and a number of experts were surprised to hear somebody as skilled and well strained and as knowledgeable as john sauer, take donald trump political arguments and try to weave them into legal theories. the judges pushed back but john sauer was doing that. the two times that trump sort of reacted during the hearing today were the times that things that sound the like political arguments that made sense to him were articulated by his lawyer. he is a limber lawyer. i covered sauer in the context of what was called the second amendment protection act in missouri, which is a fairly radical law that was passed in