Author Topic: Trump attorneys argue he committed a 'technical violation of the Constitution,' but no crime  (Read 427 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline corbe

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 38,347
Trump attorneys argue he committed a 'technical violation of the Constitution,' but no crime

by Brady Knox, Breaking News Reporter 
August 06, 2023 05:28 PM


Former President Donald Trump committed a "technical violation of the Constitution," but not a crime, his attorney argues.

Appearing on NBC's Meet the Press, John Lauro made the argument when host Chuck Todd pressed him on whether his client had only engaged in a disagreement with Vice President Mike Pence, and if the latter could take actions that may lead to the 2020 election being overturned. Lauro began by arguing that Pence had never said that Trump had violated any law.

"Vice President Pence is an attorney," he said. "If he had any point said or thought that Mr. Trump, President Trump, was acting unlawfully or contrary to criminal law, he would have said that. No one ever suggested that."

Todd interjected by saying that Pence had said that Trump was asking him to violate the Constitution, to which Lauro disagreed.

<..snip..>

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/courts/trump-committed-violation-constitution-no-crime
No government in the 12,000 years of modern mankind history has led its people into anything but the history books with a simple lesson, don't let this happen to you.

Offline corbe

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 38,347
No government in the 12,000 years of modern mankind history has led its people into anything but the history books with a simple lesson, don't let this happen to you.

Offline Kamaji

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 57,915
Well, that admission is coming in to the case.  Too many people on Trump’s side don’t think carefully enough before opening their fat mouths.

Offline Maj. Bill Martin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10,858
  • Gender: Male
  • I'll make Mincemeat out of 'em"
Violating the Constitution generally is not a criminal act.  If it was, all sorts of Presidents would be in prison for signing executive orders that were later overturned, etc..

It's actually a good argument to be making.  The prosecutor essentially is going to be arguing "Trump did something really bad and must be punished", and the legal retort is going to be just because a president does something wrong does not not make it a criminal act, and this is a criminal trial.

Easy to offer a ton of examples of unconstitutional/illegal actions ordered by other Presidents.   Hell, the student loan forgiveness qualifies.  Biden ordered federal employees to engage in an action the courts determined was unlawful.

This is actually a very.important point for his lawyers to bring out, even if just for PR.