Jamie Raskin Points Out Wild Possible Outcome If Trump's 'Ludicrous' Claim Was Real

Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) painted a terrifying picture as he poked holes in Donald Trump’s claims of presidential immunity.

In a federal appeals court on Tuesday, Trump’s attorney argued that his client was immune from prosecution for actions he committed while he was in office, and that presidents cannot be prosecuted unless they were first impeached and convicted by Congress.

If that were the case, Raskin argued on CNN Tuesday evening, a president could literally get away with murder.

He said, “As a member of Congress, my first thought was, ’Well, then if the president is going to order out for the assassination of his political rivals and say, there’s a narrow margin in the Senate of two or three votes in the opposition party.

“What’s to keep him from murdering members of the Senate to make sure that he doesn’t get convicted there in order to deny a two-thirds majority?”

“He can’t be impeached or convicted because he’s murdered his opposition, and he can’t be prosecuted for it because he hasn’t been impeached or convicted,” he added.

Echoing many other legal experts, Raskin panned the argument, describing it as “utterly ludicrous.”

“Nobody has ever even attempted such an absurd argument in American history, but it shows you how outlandish and deranged Donald Trump’s worldview is at this point,” he said.

Trump is seeking to have his federal election subversion case thrown out on the basis of presidential immunity, though it’s unlikely he will be successful, given the reactions of the appeals panel judges.

When asked by one judge if a president could face prosecution if he had assassinated a political rival but not been impeached, Trump’s attorney gave a “qualified yes ― if he is impeached and convicted first.”

Support