On Thursday, the Supreme Court delved into oral arguments over Trump’s claim of presidential immunity in Jack Smith’s January 6 case in DC. This follows a federal appeals court decision that ruled Trump could be prosecuted, rejecting his immunity plea.
Trump’s legal representatives have asserted that he maintains immunity from federal prosecution for alleged “crimes” allegedly committed during his service as President of the United States.
Before the Supreme Court lies the pivotal question of whether a sitting US President possesses immunity from criminal prosecution for official, non-personal actions.
Conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh questioned DOJ prosecutor Michael Dreeben, a former member of the Mueller team, about why former President Barack Obama was never indicted for drone strikes targeting civilians.
“How about President Obama’s drone strikes?” Kavanaugh asked Michael Dreeben.
Dreeben defended former President Obama’s drone strikes, which resulted in the deaths of innocent civilians.
“So the office of legal counsel looked at this very carefully and determined number one that the federal murder statute does apply to the Executive Branch, but the president wasn’t personally carrying out the strike, but the aiding and abetting laws are broad and determined that a public authority exception is built into statutes and that applied particularly to the murder statute that talks about unlawful killing did not apply to the drone strike,” Dreeben said.
Dreeben should have just stated that Barack Obama benefits from “Democrat privilege,” and save a lot of time.
AUDIO:
Justice Kavanaugh asks DOJ Lawyer if Barack Obama should be prosecuted over his use of drone strikes against civilians pic.twitter.com/7yBMmQMMZM
— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) April 25, 2024
Share your thoughts by scrolling down to leave a comment.
