[000:00:38;24] >> MUSTICETION,
[000:00:41;27] HIST
[000:00:42;17] NTIAL
[000:00:42;27] PUT ONECEC CEIMEY
[000:00:45;11] PRIT TIIDTUIGLARICO
[000:00:46;11] AGAINST IT.
[000:00:47;26] I WELCOME THE COURTS QUESTIONS.
[000:00:48;26] >> TO YOUR LAST POINT
[000:00:51;03] KOBA COULD YOU BE MOR'EXD AST T' ARTICLES.
[000:00:55;13] THAT MATCHES THE ORIGINAL
[000:00:56;02] UNDE WHAT AN OFFICIAL ACT
[000:00:58;22] IS?
[000:00:59;06] >> THAT CASE
[000:01:00;15] WHICH WAS A CIVIL CASE.
[000:01:01;20] >> IS
[000:01:03;10] APPOINTING AMBASSADORS IN THE
[000:01:04;12] PRESIDENT APPOINTS A PARTICULAR
[000:01:06;27] I AM MADE AMBASSADOR.
[000:01:07;16] W SE ESSENTIALLY
[000:01:10;09] UNRESTRICTED WILL BEFORE THE
[000:01:10;29] CONGRET.
[000:01:11;10] CT
[000:01:11;23] INNOCENT.
[000:01:13;01] TH GIN ALL THE IMMUNE
[000:01:14;11] OFFICIALS -- ARE YOU SUPPOSED TO NOT
[000:01:16;19] SAY WHAT IT'S FOR BECAUSE WITHIN
[000:01:18;02] ENN
[000:01:18;06] HAPRAN N
[000:01:19;16] PRIVATE PURPOSE IN THAT CASE AND
[000:01:20;16] THAT'S THE SITUATION WHICH COULD
[000:01:22;06] - IT HAS TO BE ALLEGED BUT IT
[000:01:23;00] HAS TO BE PROVEN.
[000:01:25;18] IAL P
[000:01:26;04] THAT WITHIN HIS OFFICIAL ACTS
[000:01:31;19] THAT COULD WELL BE AN
[000:01:32;06] I
[000:01:32;13] F
[000:01:32;21] TH RESPONSIBILITY.
[000:01:34;07] HE'
[000:01:34;25] BECAUSE THE CHARACTERIZATION IS
[000:01:35;19] THAT THE SERIES OF OPEHOW COULD THAT
[000:01:36;13] BE?
[000:01:36;21] >>
[000:01:38;15] CONTRADICTION OF THIS CASE.
[000:01:39;09] >>DOLLITSTYE IIS E S WITHOUT FACING
[000:01:44;10] CRIMINAL
[000:01:44;21] LIABILITY.
[000:01:45;04] >>EGCOURT HAS REAFFIRMED IN AT LEAST
[000:01:47;23] NINE OR 10 --
[000:01:48;12] >>
[000:01:48;22] ASFAOCASATPRESIDENTSWHAGA A NFLECTED
[000:01:51;16] IN MANY CASES.
[000:01:51;29] >> MOTIVE AT LEAST IN THE
[000:01:57;12] ABSOLUTE IMMATHESA MEAN FOR THEIR
[000:01:58;13] OFFICIAL
[000:01:58;23] ACTS.
[000:02:00;07] IS THAT RIGHT?
[000:02:00;20] >>MAHI T FO DS HI
[000:02:02;28] OFFICIALLY
[000:02:03;10] EVEN AT THE DOCTRINE WAS
[000:02:05;11] TED BY AN IMPROPER PRIVATE
[000:02:06;14] PURPOSE COULD BE MADE IN EVERY
[000:02:07;10] SINGLE CASE.
[000:02:07;28] >>
[000:02:08;19] THFION
[000:02:09;01] IN
[000:02:10;19] TEIVES EVERY OFFICIAL
[000:02:11;06] ACT.
[000:02:12;20] THIS IS NOT JUST IN THE CASE OF
[000:02:13;12] THE PRESIDENT.NIPRI E EA
[000:02:14;23] L T CHANGE IN WHAT
[000:02:16;20] THE LAW IS RELATED TO IMMUNITY.
[000:02:17;28] KLFO
[000:02:18;05] N PROSECUTION AND EVERYBODY CRIED
[000:02:19;05] OUT AGAINST THAT.
[000:02:19;20] >>BEIS OFFICE SUBJECT
[000:02:23;05] TO POTENTIAL CRIMINAL
[000:02:24;17] E MARBURY VERSUSGH
[000:02:26;27] EVERYBODY THOUGHT THAT
[000:02:27;24] HAON
[000:02:28;22] PRESIDENT GRANTS CARRIAGE
[000:02:29;11] WRITING INTO
[000:02:31;29] BE JUST BETWEEN YOU AND
[000:02:33;18] YOUR COLLEAGUE AND THE O AFTER USING
[000:02:34;28] HIS
[000:02:35;06] OFFICE FOR HIS PRIVATE CONDUCT
[000:02:37;05] IS THAT RI MA
[000:02:37;26] EOV
[000:02:38;12] DO YOU HAVE ANY THOUGHTSMEITECIEND
[000:02:40;05] C
[000:02:40;25] THOSE ARE THE ASPECTS OF GUIDING IN
[000:02:44;03] THAT CASE THE
[000:02:44;16] POSSIBILITY OF FURTHER
[000:02:45;03] PROCEEDINGS AND TRIAL.
[000:02:46;02] >> CS RT REVERSE THE
[000:02:47;01] DCC THAT THERE IS NO THING IS
[000:02:48;04] OFFICIAL ACTS --
[000:02:48;28] >> YOUEQERDIGCTER FORESIGHTFO WHAT
[000:02:54;04] YOU BELIEVE
[000:02:56;21] OSI
[000:02:57;08] A N. SUFFICIENT?
[000:03:00;03] OR?BEICG OTOR YOU HAVE A DETERMINATION
[000:03:03;22] IN
[000:03:04;01] IF
[000:03:04;08] OBJECTIVELY AT THE VARIOUS
[000:03:06;09] RELEVANT FACTORS.
[000:03:07;10] LOOK AT THE SEPARATE
[000:03:08;21] OPINION, TN GAME HAD TO DO WITH
[000:03:11;23] THE DIFFERENT DREAM PRIVATE AND
[000:03:12;23] OFFICIAL CONDUCT.
[000:03:13;13] ERPLT E HETH
[000:03:14;27] CONTEXT WITH SPECIFIC
[000:03:15;29] DETERMINATION TO WINNOWCIAL AND PRIVATE
[000:03:17;17] CONDUCT.
[000:03:18;18] >> SORRY, IF I UNDERSTOOD
[000:03:21;09] JUSTICE
[000:03:21;27] OU THAT WAS THE QUESTION.
[000:03:23;26] HAT IS IN
[000:03:24;07] THE CATEGORICAL FILE THAT
[000:03:25;16] HYEM REASONABLE AND
[000:03:26;25] QUALIFIED IMMUNITY.
[000:03:27;11] >> ' BECAUSE
[000:03:28;23] SERIOUSLY THEY ARE HONORABLE O '
[000:03:31;03] ID AND YET THE PRESIDENT USES
[000:03:33;17] IT IN AN OUTRAGEOUS MANNER.
[000:03:34;12] BE AN OBJECTIVE
[000:03:34;26] DETERMINATION.
[000:03:35;10] >> APPLY IT THE ALLEGATIONS
[000:03:39;03] HERE.
[000:03:40;11] TF TH PLAUSIBLE THAT THAT WOULD
[000:03:43;00] BE WITHIN
[000:03:44;12] NOTION THAT THAT IS
[000:03:44;28] IMPLAUSIBLE, CAN'T BE -T ELECTED AND
[000:03:47;00] THEY WEREN'T
[000:03:47;15] CERTIFIED BY THETSTI C
[000:03:51;23] THAT'S BEEN VIEWED IN THIS
[000:03:52;15] COURT'S OP YOU THINK THE D.C.
[000:03:53;15] CIRCUIT JUDGE WRONG AND HOW IT
[000:03:54;15] DETERMINED WHAT WAS OFFICIAL R
[000:03:58;12] DETERMINATION WITH RESPECT TO
[000:03:59;19] WHAT'S OFFICIAL AND WHAT ISN'T.
[000:04:00;23] W AUL PRESIDE
[000:04:03;02] THE UNRESTRICTED WILL T OTE IT ABE
[000:04:07;29] H
[000:04:08;04] BE CONSISTENT.
[000:04:09;22] YOU CAN SEE THE PRIVATE ACT
[000:04:10;12] DON'T GET IMMUNITY.
[000:04:11;25] >>, UMSA SPREAD TO A PRIVATE ATTORNEY
[000:04:16;11] AND
[000:04:16;19] WAS WILLING TO SPREAD RUMORS
[000:04:17;25] ABOUT EL
[000:04:18;08] OUEM
[000:04:18;18] >>E PARA- ATTORNEY
[000:04:19;10] GENERAL OF UNITED STATES
[000:04:20;29] COMPARING CADETS COMMITTED
[000:04:21;18] GETTING TO THE PUBLIC OR THE
[000:04:22;07] ATE ACTS AS OPPOSED TO
[000:04:23;27] OFFICIAL ACTS?
[000:04:24;10] >> AE' RE' TO BE A DETERMINATION
[000:04:26;21] OF WHAT'S OFFICIAL TO STAGE A
[000:04:28;21] DETERMINF
[000:04:28;27] ND
[000:04:29;09] AR EXPO EYIFCH
[000:04:33;28] >> IN
[000:04:37;12] PRESIDENTTE OBJECTIVE OF THAT.
[000:04:40;28] >> IN THIS LITIGATION, DID YL IR
[000:04:44;05] WE HAVEN'T RAISED ITCASE WHEN IT WENT
[000:04:46;01] UP ON APPEAL.
[000:04:46;14] >> JUSTICE ALITO?
[000:04:48;07] >>BEE PPEAL TO PROVE THE
[000:04:50;05] OFFICIAL ACTS AS PART O TINDICATIONS
[000:04:53;18] >> I'M A LITTLE BIT FFWO T'BEHE COHA
[000:04:58;08] BASIS OF
[000:04:59;17] CRIMINAL LSES BL CONSTITUTION BY
[000:05:00;28] THE EXECUTIVE VESTING CLAUSE.
[000:05:03;03] TO CONTINUEIC O ON A LAWSUIT FILED
[000:05:06;04] IN HIS NAME
[000:05:07;04] AGAINST THE GEORGIA GOVERNOR.
[000:05:08;29] THAT.
[000:05:10;08] THAT IS UNOFFICIAL.
[000:05:10;24] >>EFOMS H ONGOING LITIGATION AND
[000:05:11;27] ONE OF
[000:05:12;07] THE STATES CHANGED THE RESULTS
[000:05:12;28] OF T P EXERCISE OF THEN'T HE HAVE
[000:05:16;00] TAKEN THIS
[000:05:16;11] ACTION JUST IN THE STATUS OF A
[000:05:17;19] CANDIDATE?
[000:05:18;00] >> ON THE ALLEGATIONS, IT'S
[000:05:19;00] CLEAR HE DID NOT THAT THIS WAS
[000:05:20;27] DONE IN AN OFFIC DEFENDANT ASKED THE
[000:05:21;23] ARIZONA HOUSE SPEAKER TO CALL
[000:05:22;14] THE LEGISLATURE INTO SESSION TO
[000:05:23;06] HOLD A HEARING BASED ON THEIR
[000:05:24;07] CL
[000:05:24;19] WHAT HE VIEWS AS THEIR JOB UNDER
[000:05:26;23] STATE LAW AND F THE ALLEGATIONS THAT
[000:05:28;19] HE WAS
[000:05:28;29] ATTEMPTING TO OVERTHROW AN
[000:05:29;23] ELECTION.
[000:05:30;10] >> A AS TO WHETHER HE'S
[000:05:31;26] IMMUNE.
[000:05:32;06] THAT'S EXTREMELY>>OLCSIEGOATIVES,
[000:05:37;12] THEY SAID WE WILL
[000:05:38;24] HE.T TH I
[000:05:40;18] OLC F NT IT NT'S
[000:05:44;26] PREROGATIVES, THEY INTERPRETED
[000:05:47;01] SELLS NUCLEAR
[000:05:47;14] SEEKERS TO A FOREIGN ADVERSARYDSLE
[000:05:49;13] AND LIKELY NOT
[000:05:49;27] IMMUNE.
[000:05:51;13] YOU HAVE TO BE IN PEACE AND
[000:05:52;27] CONVICTED FIRST.
[000:05:53;11] >>YOU'D HAVE MILITARY TO STAGE A
[000:05:58;20] COUP?
[000:06:00;10] IEY
[000:06:02;16] AND CONVICTED BEFOR
[000:06:03;28] W E HE ORDERED THE MILITARY TO STAGE
[000:06:05;23] A COUP AND YOU ARE SAYING THAT'S
[000:06:06;29] AN OFFICMUWOULD DEPEND ON
[000:06:08;08] THE CIRCUMSTANCES WHETHER IT WAS
[000:06:09;00] AN OFFICIAL ACT.
[000:06:10;01] >>UM THE GENERALS I
[000:06:11;03] DON'T FEEL LIKE LEAVING OFFICE
[000:06:12;08] AND I WANT TO STAGE A COUP.
[000:06:13;16] I FRAMERS KNEW THE
[000:06:15;15] RISK.
[000:06:16;01] >>
[000:06:17;00] BUT I JUST DON'T KNOW.
[000:06:19;20] IT'S A ME
[000:06:21;29] HEIS MUCH MORE LIKELY INSTRUCTED
[000:06:24;10] TO THE PUBLIC, THE.
[000:06:25;13] IDINOI NOT A MONARCH ON
[000:06:27;03] THE PRT EDRE
[000:06:27;22] PRTU>> THANK.REALLOW WHOLE MANNER
[000:06:32;00] OF EVIDENCE
[000:06:33;04] TO COME IN TO O BE IN ON OFFICIAL
[000:06:34;20] ACT,
[000:06:34;28] PUEXO NTCASE PERHAPS THE D W FITZGERALD.
[000:06:40;13] TIVO TRY TO
[000:06:41;02] PARDONABOUT IT UNTIL
[000:06:42;26] YOU ASKED IT.
[000:06:44;05] THAT MIGHT BE CREATED.
[000:06:44;22] >>
[000:06:47;05] AT D
[000:06:47;18] ENT DEMANDS
[000:06:48;14] OF HIM OR HER WHICH IS BOLD AND
[000:06:50;06] FEARLESS ACTION IN THE FACE OF FEELS
[000:06:51;13] HE HAS
[000:06:51;23] TO, HE WILL PARDON HIMSELF EVERY
[000:06:52;26] FOUR YEARS NOW.
[000:06:53;22] >>
[000:06:54;20] THAT WOULDN'T PROVIDE SECURITY
[000:06:55;13] N
[000:06:55;18] FO CAN
[000:06:56;22] BELY PROSECUTED, CAN
[000:06:58;12] -- DO YOU?
[000:06:59;01] EY THOUTU STATUTE YT TH C T
[000:07:01;22] IO
[000:07:01;27] TI
[000:07:02;03] DISTINCTION.
[000:07:04;02] PROFFICIAL ACTS UNDER THE THAT'S ABSOLUTELY
[000:07:06;13] CORRECT.
[000:07:07;02] >>HA FOR THE BUCKET THAT IS OFFICIAL,
[000:07:10;11] THERE IS NO CLEAR STATEMENT I AFIELDESBOT.POEC
[000:07:17;07] TIROR
[000:07:18;13] AND HAS DTIPLIN
[000:07:22;14] COMPASS WHICH IN -- WITHICOS ER T
[000:07:24;16] IT
[000:07:24;24] HAS TO BE TAKEN AWAY WHICH IS
[000:07:25;15] THE OPPOSITE OF T
[000:07:27;21] LD BE
[000:07:29;01] UNDERTAKEN IN THE FIRSTRI MOST LIKELY
[000:07:31;14] A DISTRICT COURT
[000:07:32;18] UNDER THE LOGIC OF ANDERSON.
[000:07:33;08] >> ACQUIRES IMPEACHMENT TO BE
[000:07:35;20] RIGHT?
[000:07:35;29] >> I THINK THAT'PH AREUD F.
[000:07:37;23] WHY IS THE PRESIDENT.TO
[000:07:39;20] T. CWE THINK THAT PRACTICE SHOULD
[000:07:40;20] NOT BE CRIMINAL INTENT IS
[000:07:45;19] NOT DISCOVERED UNTIL AFTERISRAERE
[000:07:49;22] SUCCESSFULLY IN PEACE, HE
[000:07:50;11] COULD BE TERMINAL --CUTION WAS
[000:07:52;28] CENTERING ON THETHL TAHE OREARCHT.N
[000:07:55;16] K EX I
[000:07:55;29] FE M T CONGRESS HAS TO
[000:07:57;19] REGULATE THE PRESIDENT'S
[000:07:58;10] CONDUCT.
[000:07:58;20] >> THANK YOU.
[000:07:59;06] ?ERSS T BUT FOR THE OFFICIAL ACTS
[000:08:01;10] OF THE
[000:08:01;19] PRESIDENT THERE IS IMMUNITY.
[000:08:03;08] IS THAT YOUR POSITION?
[000:08:03;25] >>HIIF
[000:08:04;11] TAD IT WOULDN'T
[000:08:05;12] MATTER, WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO
[000:08:07;16] ID>>W THE PUBLIC ACTS
[000:08:10;01] GET IMMUNITY.
[000:08:11;09] RE
[000:08:11;22] W OWOUCIN HT WITHOUT ANY
[000:08:14;15] RESPONSIBILITY FOR FOLLOWING THE
[000:08:15;10] BSS MEHE BE SUBJECT
[000:08:17;23] FOR PERSONAL VULNEIS T
[000:08:18;23] BO ND AND DEATH
[000:08:20;09] DECISIONS BUTO GERALD, THAT IS THE
[000:08:23;21] INFERENCIT W.
[000:08:24;06] NY SCI LAW IN
[000:08:26;19] DOING HIS JOB THAN ANYONE ELS>> HE
[000:08:28;26] IS REQUIRED TO FOLLOW NO
[000:08:30;11] THREAT OF CRIMINAL PROSECUTION.
[000:08:31;22] WHAT PREVENTS THE PRESIDENT FROMENWHO
[000:08:33;16] >> W
[000:08:34;19] T TAL
[000:08:35;14] INTO THE SEAT OF CRIMINAD IO OUT ON
[000:08:37;16] AND GEORGE WASHINGTON
[000:08:38;04] SAID WE ARE WORRIEDUA FNEEYSITTU C
[000:08:39;15] LEM
[000:08:39;23] OF THE PRESENT FEELING
[000:08:42;11] CONSTRAINEED>> LET ME ASK YOU ANOTHER
[000:08:46;27] ARGUE
[000:08:47;06] BEFORE THE D.C. CIRCUIT JUDGE
[000:08:47;27] ABOUT A CLEAR STATEMENTES THAT'S NOT
[000:08:50;14] THE QUESTION IN
[000:08:50;27] T AN ARGUMENT THAT YOU
[000:08:52;22] DIDN'T RAISE BELOW, IT SEEMS YOU
[000:08:54;08] FORFEIT.
[000:08:56;26] >> RMD'S TTIEN AVEORHOJOCERY S
[000:09:00;14] S TO THE PRESIDENT
[000:09:00;29] LIKE EVERYONE ELSE.
[000:09:02;10] WHAT IS THE CLEA>>ER C
[000:09:03;26] OBJECTIVE
[000:09:04;07] CONTEXT THAT FALLS WITHIN THE
[000:09:05;28] HEARTLAND OF CORE EXECUTIVE
[000:09:06;18] AUTHORITY.
[000:09:06;27] EBEN? MAID PLEARE CH AB FRNGOVEABMOCBOBLHE
[000:09:12;05] NDTHIS COURT SHOULD PRESERVE IT.
[000:09:14;02] I WELCOME THE COURT'S THERE IS NO
[000:09:15;23] PRESIDENTIAL
[000:09:17;02] CTPURIREAR BUSDE HATSI ETO TASKSNOIE
[000:09:20;26] BEEN RIGHT FOR CRIMINAUEIDNAATALN
[000:09:23;03] RE
[000:09:23;10] T
[000:09:23;22] SCUSIUTOT RO TNECAUGGE T HY LAW TO
[000:09:27;02] GO AFTER A
[000:09:27;13] TERRORIST FOR EXAMPLE.
[000:09:28;15] W "A FORMER PRESIDENT CAN BE
[000:09:30;23] PROSECUTED FOR HIS OFFICIAL PRESIDENT
[000:09:32;27] HAS ALLEGEDLY
[000:09:33;09] WHI B OBLIGATION
[000:09:35;01] OF AULTAE SIMPLY A
[000:09:35;29] FORMER PRESIDENT CAN BE
[000:09:37;00] UTR GO ALLEGATIONS HAVE TO BE
[000:09:38;08] PRESENTED TO A GRAND JURY.
[000:09:40;02] >>LYOUIC
[000:09:41;04] HE' IT BACK TO THE
[000:09:42;00] COURT OF APPEALS OR ISSUE AN
[000:09:44;16] G AKTH DRS ODIEN AOTPROTECTIONS IN
[000:09:48;02] A CASE JUST TWO
[000:09:48;16] YEARS AGO.
[000:09:48;27] THWHTA AT WHAT COURTS NORMALLY
[000:09:50;20] LOOK AT WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THEMM
[000:09:53;02] ATABS,NORNT ANHIER
[000:09:54;09] TEITUTENT.
[000:09:56;03] THAT HAS BEEN A LONG-STANDING
[000:09:59;15] PROPOSITIONS THAT
[000:10:00;14] A FORMER PRESIDENT HAS SOME N,AT-
[000:10:01;23] DIFFERENTLY UNDER SOME
[000:10:04;07] CIRCSERIOUS CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTIONS
[000:10:05;16] AND THAT HAS BEEN THE
[000:10:06;03] LONG-STANDING PRACTICE OF THE
[000:10:07;10] OFFICE OF LEIG JUCAYO
[000:10:08;01] PRSTNTNS
[000:10:08;25] PR T JT. TAKES
[000:10:10;07] THE FORM THAT YOU HAVE PROPOSED.
[000:10:12;00] WHY IS THAT BETTER?BEAN J FFCO AFTER
[000:10:14;26] THE PRESIDENT HAS
[000:10:15;11] LEFT OFFICE, THERE IST ST FAR-REACHING
[000:10:17;15] ASPECTS O THAT IS CORRECT.
[000:10:20;08] AND LET ME TURN THEN TO WHY --
[000:10:21;16] >>T ASPECTS OF ARTICLE TWO
[000:10:23;09] PRESIDENTIAL POWER THAT ARE
[000:10:25;13] AY KEY T
[000:10:26;01] IN S WOPINIONS SUGGEST.
[000:10:27;18] I KNOW YOU HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF
[000:10:29;06] A JISLIS AMADVOCATETITOITSSTITA PRESIDENT
[000:10:32;21] EVEN
[000:10:33;00] UNDER YOUR U THAT A SERIOUS
[000:10:35;10] CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTION EXISTS
[000:10:36;07] ON APPLYING AUT WITH A CREATIVE
[000:10:39;02] PROSECUTOR WHO WANTS TO GO AFTER
[000:10:40;20] LET ME TRYTH IS THAT THERETE
[000:10:43;16] ONATD.E
[000:10:43;23] SAPRESIDENTM SECTION 201 DOES NOTS
[000:10:45;27] THAT IS WHAT BREWSTER SAID.
[000:10:47;29] >>T' THOUGH A
[000:10:50;06] SECOND OF WHAT E THAT CONGRESS CANNOT
[000:10:54;14] CRIMINALIZE?
[000:10:54;26] >> YES.
[000:10:55;29] >> YOU CAN CALL IT IMMUNITY OR
[000:10:59;14] WERENC
[000:10:59;21] LLSHORTHAND'S SAKE? ACTS , ACT ANDTS
[000:11:04;28] ATACHA
[000:11:05;21] THLYUT
[000:11:06;02] TY BE
[000:11:07;13] PROSECUTION THAT WOULD BE N DEFAULT
[000:11:08;29] TO IT DOES
[000:11:09;11] NOT APPLY.
[000:11:11;06] >>
[000:11:11;16] HEUTPROTEST IN FRONT OF THE CAPITAL
[000:11:13;08] UNC HE DID SOMETHING AND IT
[000:11:17;05] IMPEDED AND SOUGHT TO TH OWHETHER
[000:11:18;29] HE HAS THE STATE OF
[000:11:19;15] MIND.
[000:11:22;05] IS DOING WRONG, HE
[000:11:23;14] KNOWCODEGA S.RRRIG UEWO YOU NOT TO
[000:11:25;09] VIOLATE ANY CRIMINAL LAW.
[000:11:27;17] IF HE GETS A NEGATIVE OPINION
[000:11:30;01] FROM THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, HE
[000:11:30;22] STILL COULDN'T?
[000:11:33;21] IF HE GETS ONE DOES IT ANYWAY
[000:11:35;09] E
[000:11:35;13] THE PRESIDENT IS SUBJECT TO THE
[000:11:36;05] CRIMINAL LAW AND LAW.
[000:11:38;26] >> I UNDERSTAND THATS ARD.
[000:11:42;05] PROVISIONS THAT EXCLUDE THE
[000:11:44;00] PRESIDENT, MANY MORE THAT
[000:11:45;15] EXCLUDE THE PRESIDENT, CORRECT?
[000:11:47;07] WA T ED CCOULD WE
[000:11:49;17] T
[000:11:49;26] O I
[000:11:50;04] 'AS BRIBE THAT THAT
[000:11:52;13] PERMITS THE PRESIDENT TO DO IT.
[000:11:53;05] >>, HAUTNT ACTS
[000:11:55;16] OF THE PRESIDENTNGDEAT SUBJECT TO
[000:11:58;28] ANY LAWS THAT
[000:11:59;29] ATTEMPTED TO LIMIT THOSE CORE
[000:12:00;20] POWERS?
[000:12:02;18] YOU ARE DEFINING CORE POWERS
[000:12:04;02] AS THOSE SPECIFIED BY ARTICLE
[000:12:04;23] TWO.
[000:12:05;01] >> OHA
[000:12:05;28] WH
[000:12:06;05] >> HE HAS TO EXE LAW AND THEY HAVE
[000:12:08;12] TO MAKE DECISIONS ABOUT
[000:12:10;12] QUESTIONS THAT ARE
[000:12:11;03] KE
[000:12:11;10] ANYBODY ELSE?
[000:12:13;23] >>PO
[000:12:14;11] OBE
[000:12:15;19] TO
[000:12:15;27] ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT
[000:12:17;28] IDTT P
[000:12:18;10] UDTH ANY
[000:12:20;15] IMPAIRMENT OF A PROPERTY
[000:12:21;06] INTEREST?
[000:12:21;18] OF AFUNCTION THAN THE CERTIFICATION
[000:12:22;24] OF WHOINTERFERES SERIOUSLY WITH ANY
[000:12:25;07] GOVERNMENT OPERATION.
[000:12:26;00] >> ENRT I NGENST . T CI TO HAVE THEIR
[000:12:30;08] VOTE COUNTED
[000:12:30;21] FOR THE CANDIDATES WHO THEY
[000:12:31;12] CHOSE.
[000:12:31;23] >> LAYERS OF PROTECTION YOU
[000:12:33;15] THINK EXISTS?
[000:12:34;02] I'M GOING TO START WITH WHAT THE
[000:12:35;23] D.C. CIRCUITS AT.
[000:12:36;12] IOOR
[000:12:37;06] >> HOW ROBUST IS THAT
[000:12:40;15] PROTECTION?
[000:12:41;07] RT
[000:12:41;18] FEDERAL PROSECUTORS.
[000:12:43;02] AVTO I WOULD
[000:12:43;27] SUGGEST LOOKING AT THE CHARGES
[000:12:45;05] IN THE CASE.
[000:12:45;18] >>O ECPANTD A HO IS WIDELY REGARDED
[000:12:49;10] AS HAVING ABUSED THE POWER OFT?D
[000:12:50;18] PELE STATES TO GET
[000:12:51;28] THEM TO REVERSE ELECTORAL
[000:12:52;17] RESULTS.
[000:12:52;27] >> I UNDERSTAND THAT.
[000:12:55;09] HIL
[000:12:55;18] HI FROM
[000:12:56;05] UNWARRANTEDN OT
[000:12:58;14] PROSECUTIONS AREN'T
[000:12:59;03] SUPPORTED BY EVIDENCE AND THEY
[000:13:00;01] ARE FEDERAL PROSECUTOR
[000:13:01;12] REALLY WANTED TO INDICT A CASE
[000:13:03;06] IN THE GRAND JURY REFUSED TO DO
[000:13:05;06] >> O
[000:13:05;18] CAR PINTHN HEFOORL TATHE WATERGATE
[000:13:07;07] SMOKING GUN CASE FBI TO SHUT
[000:13:10;26] DOWN A CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION.
[000:13:11;17] >>ERYOY DUCOULDN'T THAT HAVE BEEN
[000:13:13;17] CHARGEDRS ST ROOSEVELT MADE THE
[000:13:16;27] DECISION WITH THE ADVICE REARATSU
[000:13:19;17] MADE AND WAS ENDORSED
[000:13:21;04] BY THE COURT PERHAPSOR
[000:13:23;18] HAD BEEN MADE SPECIFIC
[000:13:25;01] SO THERE IS NOTICE TO THE
[000:13:25;20] PRESID T COSIENERAL THAT
[000:13:26;15] SOMETHING IS LAWFULRE OVWH IT WOULD
[000:13:32;21] BE A ROOT
[000:13:33;16] VIOLATION OF DUE PROCESS TO
[000:13:34;05] WNIDEVF THERE
[000:13:34;24] IS ANY POSSIBLY RI A RESULT OF THIS
[000:13:37;09] ONCE
[000:13:37;17] IN HISTORY PROSECUTION.
[000:13:39;04] >> HIMSELF, WHICH CAME UP
[000:13:41;01] EARLIER EN DN. H FURTHER AND THIS
[000:13:42;03] COURT HAD
[000:13:42;25] NOT ADDRESSEEA WHICH JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
[000:13:46;14] REP'
[000:13:47;02] HA COUPLE
[000:13:47;17] DAYS OF OFFICE WILL PARDON
[000:13:48;08] THEMSELVES FROM ANYTHING THEY
[000:13:48;29] MIGHTYUBR
[000:13:50;13] AGD BEOGRO LN REGIME IS NOT GOINGSTAT
[000:13:52;17] TRE T PEACEFULLY, IF
[000:13:54;05] THAT CANDIDATE IS THE INCUMBENT.
[000:13:55;05] >> OF COURSE.
[000:13:56;07] AFFT ITZEOK PROCESS WHERE THE
[000:13:58;12] LOSER SUPU K OROFE EYO ITH THAT.
[000:14:00;01] >> THANK YOU.
[000:14:00;24] .
[000:14:01;01] >>ICELUM
[000:14:01;28] CT I 'AT
[000:14:02;22] ATTE BECAUSE WE HAVE
[000:14:03;24] DESTROYED OUR DEMOCRACY ON OUR
[000:14:05;13] OWN, IS IT?
[000:14:06;09] BU AN THAT ARE THE ANTITHESIS OF
[000:14:08;05] DEMOCRACY --
[000:14:08;17] >>TH LAW CONSTITUTION.
[000:14:11;29] >> JUSTICE KAGAN?
[000:14:13;27] >>D O Y THAT THEY
[000:14:15;18] ARE CORE EXECUTIVE FUNCTIONS.
[000:14:17;10] WHAT ARE THOSE SMALL CAT
[000:14:17;29] AYHIHE , ER IN THE
[000:14:18;23] NATIONAL SECURITY ROUND.
[000:14:20;14] IT>>OWE OTRGHU DHE U AN TUE FED
[000:14:27;15] VIEWED AS INHERENT IN
[000:14:29;01] THEIS OFFICIAL ANULHYPRNO OF CF HA
[000:14:32;14] CRIMINAL LAW INVOLVE THE MISUSE
[000:14:35;05] OF OFFIC DLHEOULD BE UNDERSTOOD
[000:14:36;02] AS ALLOWING IT,IN DETSCE
[000:14:37;24] TWOTH T LI I T GI
[000:14:38;24] .EXISESH
[000:14:39;07] NNTOUC
[000:14:39;24] L
[000:14:40;04] IDNSBE
[000:14:40;15] T PRESIDENT'S
[000:14:42;03] POWE SEUS Y WHETHER OR NOT THERE
[000:14:44;01] IS THIS
[000:14:44;13] ACT ISFU.LINITHUR PRECEDENT THAT
[000:14:45;23] BEARS
[000:14:46;02] SOME ANALOGY TO THIS
[000:14:47;01] RSNCKE
[000:14:47;12] LYDHIT
[000:14:48;12] THE ARTICLE ONE BRANCH AND THE
[000:14:49;17] ARTICLE TWORA IT INDUCT, THE COURT
[000:14:52;09] MAY WISHNEPO QAN
[000:14:54;05] CHARACTERIZE WHAT IS
[000:14:54;22] OFFICIAL AND WHAT IS NOT
[000:14:56;06] OFFICIAL IN THIS INDICTMENT.
[000:14:56;27] E WENATAT
[000:14:57;23] AAS ANGCAISING TO GIN UP
[000:14:59;21] FRAUDULENT SLATES OF
[000:15:01;21] >> THERE IS AN ALLEGATION IN THE
[000:15:02;13] INDICTMENT THAT HAS TO DO WITH
[000:15:03;04] THE REMOVAL OF A JUSTICE
[000:15:03;22] DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL.
[000:15:04;17] DUGRAT
[000:15:04;28] AINACESERN US
[000:15:05;22] ALHEREVETHEP W A TMPOIOMPANE FRAUDULENT
[000:15:07;14] LETTERS WERE SENT.
[000:15:08;25] IT WOULD HAVE MADE THEVE
[000:15:10;27] BUT HOW DOES THAT RELATE TO THE
[000:15:13;12] STNDT WERIO TENWEHRINT
[000:15:14;27] >> THANK YOU.
[000:15:15;11] >> JUSTICE GORSUCH?
[000:15:17;15] >>D FRAMEWORK WAS THE
[000:15:19;09] APPROPRIATAR AIOE S
[000:15:20;04] E THAN
[000:15:22;23] BLASINGAME
[000:15:23;23] ME AN EXAMPLE OF
[000:15:24;08] WHATER
[000:15:27;18] HERE, BECAUSEBU R >>XT
[000:15:28;22] DECISION, BUT LET
[000:15:29;07] ME OFFER A FEWITASBJEWH
[000:15:30;20] ON
[000:15:31;00] S OFFICE SEEKER, NOT
[000:15:32;00] ASOUST FOCUSED ON THE
[000:15:33;26] LEGAL TEST.
[000:15:34;06] T OFF-LIMITS THAN I
[000:15:35;24] WOUL>>
[000:15:36;05] OT
[000:15:36;11] OWHEIS THATISGE THERE IS A LOT OF
[000:15:39;16] CONCERN ABOUT SAYING RENS,ON AY PERSONAL
[000:15:41;17] MOTIVATION THOUG T MNG APPOINTEE,
[000:15:44;11] A
[000:15:44;18] PRESIDENTIAL APPOINTEE A CORE
[000:15:46;22] POWERT ITERTI EG
[000:15:47;17] IMPOSE RESTRICTIONS ON REMOVAL.
[000:15:52;03] SIPO FOR CORRUPT PURPOMPAL NOT, AT
[000:15:56;05] THE
[000:15:56;13] FRONTIND AS
[000:15:59;13] APPLIED CONSTITUTIONAL ANALYSIS.UENC
[000:16:00;22] H A LEFT OF EITHER
[000:16:04;05] AN
[000:16:04;09] ES
[000:16:04;20] CTIVES
[000:16:04;29] AND>> ASIDE, INTENTION IS
[000:16:08;20] EMOTIVE ANDMO K
[000:16:12;07] FOR SURE.
[000:16:14;12] CLS
[000:16:14;17] XOGEREN I O
[000:16:15;15] ANIM
[000:16:15;24] H DO
[000:16:16;07] OKRESTRICTIONS THEY DO
[000:16:16;25] PLACE ON THE PRESIDENT'SRI. HEPO PANLA
[000:16:18;27] RNO HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT PROSECUTING
[000:16:19;23] PRESIDENTS FOR THAT.
[000:16:20;09] >> THANK YOU.
[000:16:20;22] >> JUSTICE KAVANAUGH' F D
[000:16:24;14] THIS MAGNITUDE THAT INVOLVES
[000:16:26;03] EQUITIES THAT ARE FAR BEYOND
[000:16:26;23] THISS SORN
[000:16:28;00] OPTHE G OTHAP S.REE
[000:16:29;29] OSNDATE
[000:16:30;09] OFJUAT C
[000:16:31;03] RY TO
[000:16:31;12] ALLAY THAT CONCERN.
[000:16:31;28] WHY IS THIS NOT ORSON V OLSON
[000:16:34;07] LL ER NG WITHOUT THESE PROSECUTIONS
[000:16:36;16] HAVING GON REAGAN,
[000:16:37;17] BUSH, AND CLINTON WHETHER
[000:16:39;25] TURT SESYWERA, II'ISIOOFCA T
[000:16:43;10] SAYS ABOUT THE VIETNAM WAR.
[000:16:44;03] 371ROCEAE .I T E AD DEUAAB CMAY.
[000:16:46;09] D TI
[000:16:48;12] CRD
[000:16:48;27] THEORY THAT I'M
[000:16:49;14] INTERFERING WITH THE
[000:16:50;00] INVESTIGATION OFIO OF PRESIDENTIAL
[000:16:51;24] POSSIBILITY THAT CONGRESS CANNOT
[000:16:52;16] REGULATE.
[000:16:52;27] >> HOW ABOUT PRESIDENT OBAMA'SATENINERITIN
[000:16:55;12] SPRUM T>> THANK YOU FOR YOUR ANSWERS.
[000:16:58;23] >>
[000:16:59;05] M
[000:16:59;09] G OR
[000:16:59;20] OVWEK DIINNIXON AND FITZGERALD, THAT
[000:17:01;06] IS
[000:17:01;14] WHAT IT SOUNDS LIKE TO M
[000:17:02;04] INIVE TH STO BE.
[000:17:03;02] THERE ISSU TOFECT THDE WELL, AS AUTG
[000:17:08;27] BUT THEN THE
[000:17:09;28] PUBLIC AUTHORITY DEFENSE MIGHT
[000:17:10;19] NOT APPLY BECAUSE YOU HAD A BSOPAJUSTICE,
[000:17:12;21] AND IT IS AN
[000:17:13;04] OBJECTIVELY VALIDIORIRE
[000:17:15;17] A
[000:17:15;24] FREEDOM FROM STANDING TRIAL, BUT
[000:17:18;00] NOT A GET OUT OF TAY
[000:17:18;22] G AT YENEG T
[000:17:20;02] VIOLATION OF THE
[000:17:22;03] STATUTENGINAP ENE E IT SEEMS TO ME
[000:17:25;17] SOME OF THESE I
[000:17:26;26] T
[000:17:27;04] ISE TTHA OT IMT
[000:17:28;00] TE
[000:17:28;02] P RAS EVEN DIFFERENT FROM THE RADICAL
[000:17:31;15] OUSO THNEPP AT
[000:17:32;24] THE
[000:17:34;20] WITH BASIC
[000:17:35;10] NDOTD NAGEL WHERE THE COURT SAID
[000:17:37;04] URNO
[000:17:37;09] EER PRESIDENT, UNLIKE ALL OTHER
[000:17:39;02] OFFICIALS, DESERVES MORE OF A
[000:17:40;20] IN ARERUT
[000:17:41;08] LO FROM STANDIN' A H IUTAWERENE COTAHAPRARHA
[000:17:43;24] T INSULATION
[000:17:44;17] FOR FORMERC'G ONU RACENON
[000:17:46;16] CI T PROCEED
[000:17:47;03] BASED ON THE PRIVATE CONDUCT AND
[000:17:49;04] DROP THE OFFICIAL CSNDE AICHQUTE SDAE,CE
[000:17:50;29] CERTH'RYNA Y S TIRE
[000:17:52;03] LD PER USED
[000:17:53;06] EVEN IF CULPABILITY CAN'T REST
[000:17:53;29] ON IT.
[000:17:54;29] >> DE
[000:17:56;01] G
[000:17:56;11] TO
[000:17:56;14] ED DEN TI
[000:17:57;05] IDTHE CONSTITUTIONAL
[000:17:59;05] QUESTION THAT IS BEING AVOIDED?
[000:18:01;25] OF THAT WOULD AVOID
[000:18:02;18] A SERIOUS CONSTITUTIONAL
[000:18:03;21] IIO CQUESTION IN THE PRESIDENT BE
[000:18:06;20] HELD LIABLE CONSISTENT WITH THE
[000:18:07;13] HE WORDS, ANYS.E, SES
[000:18:10;01] TA NOWT?
[000:18:11;13] JUST ONE DATA POINT FOR THE
[000:18:12;03] COURT IN THIIEIAR AT AIC
[000:18:13;28] THOUGHT OF THAT AND SOME MEMBER
[000:18:15;10] OF THE COURT WOULD HAVE REACTED.
[000:18:16;13] HIUS
[000:18:16;22] AV
[000:18:17;00] GALIOWEACTS GET IMMUNITYSW
[000:18:20;26] BME WSUITS.
[000:18:22;25] THAT IS NOT A GREAT THING AND
[000:18:24;13] TTHSU T WHICH
[000:18:25;15] WITHIN THAT MIGHT BE SUBJECT TO
[000:18:26;07] LIABILITY?
[000:18:28;00] ERND DETERMIENIFHAKI EAT T ALLOW
[000:18:30;16] EACH DELEGATION TO BE
[000:18:32;16] BROUGHTULHAIGATION.
[000:18:35;04] YOU'VE PUT ALL OF YOUR
[000:18:37;05] T?HAAL
[000:18:39;02] SU ARE ANY
[000:18:40;08] CORE ACTS THAT HAVE BEEN ALLEGED
[000:18:41;00] IN THE INDICTMENTS THAT WOULD O
[000:18:42;12] ERENT
[000:18:42;21] SIDES OFTHAK E THND ALSO BE MITIGATED
[000:18:47;13] BY THE
[000:18:47;22] HAE DSOJUUNDERSTANDING THAT FS STS
[000:18:50;08] PP SO THAT THE PROPER
[000:18:50;27] FUNCTIONING OF THE PRESIDENT
[000:18:53;18] ANDT AND I WOULD AMEIC TN OPEIN
[000:18:57;28] EYIN IN HIS
[000:18:59;03] ABILITY TO FUNCTION.
[000:18:59;24] SO COULD YOU PLEASE TALK ABOUT
[000:19:01;11] ACO TE E WORKS, AND TO ALTER IT
[000:19:04;08] POSES MORE RISKS.
[000:19:05;28] >> THANK YOU.
[000:19:06;16] RETTED.
[000:19:09;29] >> THE HONORABLE COURTANNOUNCER: AND
[000:19:19;02] THE JUSTICES
[000:19:19;15] WRAPPING UP ORAL ARGUMENTS IN
[000:19:20;06] THE PRESIDENTIAL IMMUNITY CASE
[000:19:21;12] CONCERNING FORMER PRESIDENT
[000:19:22;02] DONALD TRUMP.
[000:19:24;06] THE CASE WILL DETERMINE WHETHER
[000:19:25;21] THE FORMER PRESIDENT WILL BE
[000:19:27;07] ABLE TO AVOID CRIMINAL
[000:19:27;24] PROSECUTION FOR HIS ALLEGED ROLE
[000:19:29;08] IN TRYING TO OVERTURN THE
[000:19:31;10] RESULTS OF THE 2020 ELECTION.
[000:19:33;09] DURING THE HEARING, JUSTICES
[000:19:35;11] CITED PREVIOUS CASES OF
[000:19:35;29] PRESIDENTIAL IMMUNITY.
[000:19:40;13] JUSTICE KAGAN HIGHLIGHTING THAT
[000:19:42;29] THE FRAMERS OF THE CONSTITUTION
[000:19:44;05] DID NOT ADD AN IMMUNITY CLAUSE
[000:19:45;05] IN THE CONSTITUTION, AS POINTED
[000:19:48;07] OUT BY CNN'S CAITLIN COLDITZ.
[000:19:49;20] THIS EVENING AT 8:00 EASTERN, WE
[000:19:52;03] WILL TAKE YOUR CALLS AND COMMENT
[000:19:53;07] AND SHOW TODAY'S ORAL ARGUMENT.
[000:19:55;25] TAKING A LOOK AT SOME OF THE
[000:19:57;04] SIGHTS AND SOUNDS OUTSIDE THE
[000:19:58;12] COURT WHERE PROTESTERS ARE
[000:19:59;01] GATHERED.
[000:20:26;18] ♪
[000:21:41;16] >> LET IT GO.
[000:21:45;17] LET IT GO.
[000:21:47;17] LET IT GO.
[000:21:51;20] ♪
[000:22:29;22] ♪
[000:22:34;25] >> C-SPAN'S CAMERAS OUTSIDE THE
[000:22:38;21] SUPREME COURT.
[000:22:40;28] WE ARE EXPECTING IF WE DO SEE OR
[000:22:42;13] HEAR FROM SOME OF THE LAWYERS
[000:22:45;01] WHO ARGUED THE CASE, WE WILL
[000:22:46;01] MAKE SURE TO BRING YOU THEIR
[000:22:48;01] REMARKS IN AN IMMUNITY CASE
[000:22:51;10] DEALING WITH FORMER PRESIDENT
[000:22:52;01] DONALD TRUMP.
[000:22:53;05] THE QUESTION BEFORE THE COURT
[000:22:55;16] WHETHER MR. TRUMP CAN BE TRIED
[000:22:57;08] ON CRIMINAL CHARGES THAT HE
[000:22:58;19] CONSPIRED TO OVERTURN THE
[000:22:59;10] RESULTS OF THE 2020 ELECTION.
[000:23:01;12] JUST GETTING A LOOK OUTSIDE THE
[000:23:02;27] COURT RIGHT NOW WITH SOME OF THE
[000:23:04;14] ONLOOKERS THAT WERE PROTESTERS
[000:23:06;03] AS WELL.
[000:23:07;17] THE OUTCOME OF THIS WILL
[000:23:08;28] DETERMINE NOT ONLY WHETHER
[000:23:10;05] DONALD TRUMP'S TRIAL IN
[000:23:10;25] WASHINGTON D.C. BEFORE A U.S.
[000:23:13;06] DISTRICT COURT CAN GO FORWARD
[000:23:15;05] BUT ALSO WHETHER THE FORMER
[000:23:16;24] PRESIDENT TRIALS IN FLORIDA AND
[000:23:17;16] GEORGIA CAN PROCEED.
[000:23:19;26] AGAIN, WE COULD SEE LAWYERS HERE
[000:23:20;18] WHO ARGUED THE CASE TO REPORTERS
[000:23:22;13] OUTSIDE THE COURT.
[000:23:25;01] WATCHING LIVE COVERAGE HERE ON
[000:23:25;22] C-SPAN.
[000:24:10;05] ♪
[000:24:31;22] >> VOTE DONALD TRUMP!
[000:24:43;00] ♪
[000:25:25;01] >> JUST GETTING A LOOK AT THE
[000:25:29;16] SIGHTS AND SOUNDS ISAIAH THE
[000:25:30;20] SUPREME COURT AFTER JUSTICES
[000:25:31;10] HEARD TRUMP V. UNITED STATES
[000:25:34;07] LOOKING AT IMMUNITY CLAIMS BY
[000:25:35;23] FORMER PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP
[000:25:36;17] AND THIS EVENING AT 8:00 EASTERN
[000:25:37;22] WILL TAKE YOUR CALLS AND
[000:25:39;11] COMMENTS AND WE WILL SHOW
[000:25:40;00] TODAY'S ORAL ARGUMENTS IN ITS
[000:25:41;27] ENTIRETY.
[000:25:44;14] THE FORMER PRESIDENT WAS A NEW
[000:25:45;23] YORK CRIMINAL COURT FOR HIS HUSH
[000:25:46;15] MONEY TRIAL DECISION AS TO
[000:25:48;25] WHETHER OR NOT HE VIOLATED THE
[000:25:49;16] COURT ISSUED GAG ORDER BEING
[000:25:53;00] ANNOUNCED TODAY.
[000:25:53;21] SHORTLY BEFORE COURT STARTED
[000:25:55;24] THE FORMER PRESIDENT MET WITH
[000:25:56;15] SUPPORTERS AT A CONSTRUCTION
[000:25:57;25] SITE AND TALKED ABOUT THE
[000:25:59;11] ARGUMENT AT THE SUPREME COURT
[000:26:00;02] TODAY.
[000:26:32;22] >>